Evolution and Human Behaviour

Cartwright, John

doi:10.1007/978-1-137-05296-4

Cited by 37 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Humans do, however, also respond adaptively to current ecological demands (Laland and Brown, 2002). In fact, a complete Darwinian perspective recognizes that both adaptations as well as adaptability to local niches are important evolutionary mechanisms (Cartwright, 2000). Human behavior, especially that which is purposive, can therefore be construed as the result of both adaptations and adaptability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Evolutionary neuromarketing: darwinizing the neuroimaging paradigm for consumer behavior

Garcia

Saad

2008

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current paper serves two purposes. First, it reviews the neuroimaging literature most relevant to the field of marketing (e.g., neuroeconomics, decision neuroscience, and neuromarketing). Second, it posits that evolutionary theory is a consilient and organizing meta-theoretical framework for neuromarketing research. The great majority of neuroimaging studies suffer from the illusion of explanatory depth namely the sophistication of the neuroimaging technologies provides a semblance of profundity to the reaped knowledge, which is otherwise largely disjointed and atheoretical. Evolutionary theory resolves this conundrum by recognizing that the human mind has evolved via the processes of natural and sexual selection. Hence, in order to provide a complete understanding of any given neuromarketing phenomenon requires that it be tackled at both the proximate level (as is currently the case) and the ultimate level (i.e., understanding the adaptive reason that would generate a particular neural activation pattern). Evolutionary psychology posits that the human mind consists of a set of domain-specific computational systems that have evolved to solve recurring adaptive problems. Accordingly, rather than viewing the human mind as a general-purpose domain-independent organ, evolutionary cognitive neuroscientists recognize that many neural activation patterns are instantiations of evolved computational systems in evolutionarily relevant domains such as survival, mating, kin selection, and reciprocity. As such, an evolutionary neuromarketing approach recognizes that the neural activation patterns associated with numerous marketing-related phenomena can be mapped onto the latter Darwinian modules thus providing a unifying meta-theory for this budding discipline.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Evolutionary neuromarketing: darwinizing the neuroimaging paradigm for consumer behavior

Garcia

Saad

2008

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Divided loyalties and feelings of betrayal may become evident when biological parents encourage stepparents to become involved parental figures (Cartwright, 2000). For these reasons, clinicians emphasise the value in stepparent roles that are not based on the biological parent role (Levin, 1997;Mills, 1984;Walker & Messinger, 1979) and encourage stepfamily members in considering alternative parenting roles.…”

Section: The Stepparent Rolementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is suggested that these behaviours are unconscious, with parents adopting established patterns of behaviour acquired during the single parent phase (Bray & Kelly, 1999) or attempting to protect close mother-child bonds . While most researchers suggest that these behaviours are problematic in interfering in an independent relationship between stepparents and stepchildren (Bray & Kelly, 1999;Erera-Weatherley, 1996;Rosin, 1987;Whitsett & Land, 1992), stepchildren may appreciate biological parents who encourage stepparents in limiting active parenting involvement (Cartwright, 2000) and gate keeping behaviours may be one way that biological parents do this.…”

Section: Gate Keeping Behaviours By the Biological Parentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other researchers have emphasised the ambivalence and conflict experienced by children, and biological parents, when stepparents become prematurely involved in active disciplinary behaviours Cartwright, 2000;Funder, 1996;Mills, 1984;Moore & Cartwight, 2005;. Findings of this nature suggest that stepchildren hold different views regarding their stepparent's involvement in discipline when compared to biological parent's involvement.…”

Section: Intra-role Discrepanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The differences among stepfamily members' regarding the ideal stepparent role are consistent with stepfamily literature that identifies biological parents as actively encouraging stepparent involvement; in contrast to stepchildren who may prefer stepparents to be less involved in a parental role than their parents. Many researchers and clinicians have emphasised that this active encouragement by biological parents may lead to conflict with their children, who may prefer biological parents to retain primary parenting responsibility, particularly for discipline Cartwright, 2000;Cartwright & Seymour, 2002;Moore and Cartwright;Funder, 1996) and prefer their parents to encourage their stepparents to do so. Biological parents may do this for a variety of reasons, such as a desire to encourage parenting assistance after exhaustion from the single parent phase (Hetherington & Kelly, 2002), or to be seen as an ‗ordinary' family with two involved parental figures (Levin, 1997).…”

Section: Inter-role Discrepanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Stepparent Role: How It Is Defined and Negotiated in Stepfamilies in New Zealand

Graham¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Many children in New Zealand spend at least part of their lives growing up in stepfamilies. Yet despite the prevalence of stepfamilies and indications that they are increasing, there is little certainty regarding the parenting role stepparents should adopt to benefit their stepchildren the most. This ambiguity is further reflected in the law; with stepparents having few legal responsibilities to their stepchildren. This research sought to identify how individuals define and negotiate the stepparent‘s role in newly formed stepfamilies in New Zealand. Previous research and clinical practice indicates that how this role is defined is closely tied to stepfamily well-being. However there is still a great deal we do not understand about how stepfamily members construct this role, the nature of change over time, and how it is negotiated among stepfamily members. One hundred and five stepfamilies that had been cohabiting full-time for less than four years completed questionnaires assessing individual perceptions of stepparent roles and stepfamily functioning. Three stepfamily members completed questionnaires at two points in time, twelve months apart– a target stepchild between the ages of seven and eleven, the resident biological parent, and stepparent. Results suggest that stepparents, parents and children perceive stepparents to play active roles in both the warmth and control aspects of the stepparent role and these perceptions change minimally over a twelve-month period. When discrepancies between actual and ideal role scores were examined (intra-role discrepancies), all stepfamily members reported wanting the stepparent to be more involved in warmth behaviours than they actually were. However, although parents and stepparents reported ideally wanting stepparents to be more involved in control behaviours as well, children wanted them to be less involved in control behaviours than they were currently. Role discrepancies at time 1 were associated with aspects of stepfamily functioning at time 2, particularly for children.There was some evidence that role discrepancies reduced over time. In particular, stepparents and children reported lower inter-role discrepancies (higher role agreement) and stepparents and children both reported lower intra-role discrepancies over time. When role discrepancies between stepfamily members were examined (inter-role discrepancies), stepchildren reported wanting stepparents to be less involved in warmth and control dimensions than either parents or stepparents. Regression analyses revealed that children‘s inter and intra role discrepancies were significantly associated with their reports of stepfamily functioning twelve months later, after taking into account the stepparent‘s actual involvement. Adults in stepfamilies used various strategies to negotiate the stepparent role; including partner discussions, talks with children, checking in for feedback with children and biological parents, and gate keeping behaviours by the biological parent. Role negotiation was more likely to occur in the following twelve months when stepfamily functioning was more problematic at time 1, and there was some evidence that this led to improvements in functioning over time. This was not the case for gate keeping behaviours—while these were reported to be more frequently used when stepfamily functioning was problematic; they had a detrimental effect on the quality of the stepparent-stepchild relationships. These findings have important implications for organisations that work with, and make decisions affecting stepfamilies.</p>

show abstract

The Behavioral Genetics of Human Pair Bonding

Walum

Westberg

2011

From DNA to Social Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolution and Human Behaviour

Cited by 37 publications

References 0 publications

Evolutionary neuromarketing: darwinizing the neuroimaging paradigm for consumer behavior

Evolutionary neuromarketing: darwinizing the neuroimaging paradigm for consumer behavior

The Stepparent Role: How It Is Defined and Negotiated in Stepfamilies in New Zealand

The Behavioral Genetics of Human Pair Bonding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About