The immoral behavior of poor guys was attributed to situational factors and was discounted, whereas wealthy guys’ behavior was perceived as less excusable & was attributed primarily to bad moral character

Weiner, D. S., & Laurent, S. M. (2020). The (income-adjusted) price of good behavior: Documenting the counter-intuitive, wealth-based moral judgment gap. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. Sept 2020. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000952

Abstract: Poor people are punished more frequently and more severely than are wealthy people for their transgressions, suggesting that an agent’s wealth affects how they are morally evaluated. To our knowledge, this has not been tested empirically. An initial study found that people expect the poor to be judged more harshly than the wealthy. Several other experiments consistently found that the reverse was true: Poor targets were judged as less immoral than wealthy targets for the same moral violations. Explanations of this wealth-based moral judgment gap were explored, including differences in descriptive/prescriptive expectations, global anti-wealthy or pro-poor biases, and differences in how people understand and explain the behavior of wealthy and poor moral transgressors. Although the moral judgment gap is likely multiply determined, poor targets were consistently viewed as having better reasons than the wealthy to act badly. Thus, the immoral behavior of poor targets was attributed to situational factors and was discounted, whereas wealthy targets’ behavior was perceived as less excusable and was attributed primarily to bad moral character. A final study extended our findings to the domain of prosocial behavior. Consistent with a reasons-based explanation, poor targets were viewed as having better moral character than wealthy targets when their behavior benefitted others, and wealthy targets were viewed as having more extrinsic reasons to behave prosocially.

Sex differences in the use of competitive tactics have been well documented & may reflect evolved predispositions; some say these differences may be eliminated in single-sex environments; paper says the differences persist

Deaner, R. O., McClellan, A., Zeigler-Hill, V., & Benenson, J. F. (2020). Sex differences in exclusion and aggression on single-sex sports teams. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, Aug 2020. https://doi.org/10.1037/ebs0000247

Abstract: Sex differences in the use of competitive tactics have been well documented and may reflect evolved predispositions. Recent research, however, suggests these differences may be eliminated in single-sex environments. We addressed this possibility by surveying men and women about their recent experiences as members of college (n = 376) and high school (n = 485) single-sex sports teams. We focused on participants’ recollections of being targets of exclusion or overt aggression by their teammates. In both samples, women were significantly more likely than men to recall being excluded (college Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.88; high school OR = 1.67) and receiving overt verbal aggression (ORs = 9.15, 3.30). By contrast, women were significantly less likely than men to recall receiving overt physical aggression (ORs = 0.18, 0.14). Furthermore, as predicted by the male warrior hypothesis, compared with men, women were more likely to be excluded by (ORs = 4.2, 3.36) or to receive aggression from (ORs = 13.69, 3.61) teammates in a competitive context (i.e., game) compared with other contexts. This pattern was significant for aggression in both samples and for exclusion in the high school sample. Collectively, these results indicate that differences in the behavior of men and women persist in single-sex settings where groups must cooperate against opponents.

Check also On The Evolution of The Sex Differences in Throwing: Throwing is a Male Adaptation in Humans. Michael P. Lombardo, Robert O. Deaner. The Quarterly Review of Biology, Volume 93, Number 2, June 2018. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2018/05/on-evolution-of-sex-differences-in.html

Justice is (not so) blind: Effects of facial masculinity and agreeableness on perceptions of criminal guilt

Justice is (not so) blind: Effects of facial masculinity and agreeableness on perceptions of criminal guilt. Ford, K. D., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Pound, N. (2020). Justice is (not so) blind: Effects of facial masculinity and agreeableness on perceptions of criminal guilt. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, Aug 2020. https://doi.org/10.1037/ebs0000246

Abstract: People have a tendency to make rapid judgments about the personality of others based on their facial appearance, a tendency which could have adaptive value if it helps facilitate the avoidance of individuals disposed to exploit and/or harm the perceiver. These rapid judgments, accurate or not, have the potential to influence how individuals are treated in many areas of life, including within the criminal justice system. Previous research investigating effects of appearance on judicial proceedings has suggested that a masculine facial appearance might activate criminal stereotypes, and therefore increase the likelihood of being judged guilty of a crime. To examine how masculinity might interact with other appearance dimensions, we investigated how facial morphological masculinity and perceived agreeableness influence perceptions of criminal guilt. In an online study, 369 participants (167 men, 200 women, 2 did not say) aged 18 to 82, read 12 short fictional vignettes each describing a crime (assault, burglary, or rape) with each accompanied by the face of a man “charged” with the crime. Faces were manipulated using morphing techniques to increase or decrease levels of (a) morphological masculinity and (b) perceived agreeableness (i.e., 2 × 2 manipulations for each target face). Participants were asked to indicate in each case whether they thought the “accused” was guilty or not. Overall, facial appearance had a significant effect on the probability of being judged guilty. For each crime type, manipulations of perceived agreeableness had large effects on the probability of being judged guilty, whereas manipulations of morphological masculinity did not.

Public Significance Statement—This study investigated how facial appearance can affect whether people are perceived as likely to have committed a crime. Computer graphics techniques were used to manipulate aspects of male facial shape and the facial images were presented to volunteer participants in an online study. Manipulations of perceived agreeableness in faces had large effects on the probability of an individual being judged guilty of a hypothetical crime. However, changes to the shape of the face to make it more or less masculine did not.

Keeping an intimate relationship is challenging; common reasons are “Fading away enthusiasm,” followed by “Long work hours” and “Lack of personal time and space”

The Challenges of Keeping an Intimate Relationship: An Evolutionary Examination. Menelaos Apostolou, Yan Wang. Evolutionary Psychology, September 4, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704920953526

Abstract: Keeping an intimate relationship is challenging, and many people face difficulties in doing so. In the current research, we have attempted to identify these difficulties, within the context of an evolutionary theoretical framework. More specifically, by using a combination of qualitative research methods in a sample of 163 Greek-speaking participants, we identified 78 such difficulties. By employing maximum likelihood analysis on the scores of 1,099 Greek-speaking participants, we classified these difficulties in 12 broader factors. The most important factor was “Fading away enthusiasm,” followed by “Long work hours” and “Lack of personal time and space.” Almost 70% of the participants indicated that at least one factor, and 41% indicated that three or more factors caused them difficulties. Significant sex effects were found for most factors, indicating that men and women differed in the importance they ascribed to these difficulties. Moreover, significant age, marital status and number of children effects were found for several factors.

Keywords: difficulties in keeping an intimate relationship, keeping an intimate relationship, mating, mismatch problem, intimate relationships

Discussion

In the current research, we have identified 78 difficulties in keeping and intimate relationship, and we have classified them in 12 broader factors. We have also found that enthusiasm and romantic feelings fading away quickly, along with long work hours and lack of personal time and space, were considered as the most important factors causing difficulties to people in keeping an intimate relationship. In addition, almost 70% of the participants indicated that at least one factor, and 41% indicated that three or more factors, caused them difficulties. Significant sex, age marital status and number of children effects were found for most of the factors.

The mismatch between ancestral and modern conditions is likely to account for many of the factors that have emerged here. In more detail, in the ancestral context, enthusiasm and intense romantic feelings would motivate people to start a relationship, and they are expected to reside as the relationship progresses. In a pre-industrial context, the support, protection and subsistence benefits would take over, providing the incentive to people to keep the relationship. The absence of these factors in the post-industrial context, makes the fading away of enthusiasm and romantic feelings impairing for keeping a relationship, as people lose the incentive to do so.

In the same vein, because in the ancestral context the benefits from having a family largely outweighed the costs of having unpleasant personality traits, positive selection forces would be relatively weak on personality traits that make an individual more pleasant as a partner. Thus, in the context of romantic relationships, several people today, are not easygoing, are selfish, insecure, clingy and aggressive, traits, which impair their capacity to keep an intimate relationship since their partners are not very willing to overlook them. For instance, being physically aggressive is not tolerated in the contemporary context where individual rights are well-protected and women are not dependent on their partners, having thus the opposite effect: Women would most likely walk away from an abusive partner. Furthermore, in ancestral human societies, people lived in extended families, meaning that they had many people around which could help them with raising their children (Hrdy, 2008). In post-industrial societies, people usually live on their own, away from their families, and they have to bear themselves the bulk of the demands for raising their children. Thus, selection forces may not have adequately prepared them to do so and keeping at the same time an intimate relationship.

The factors that we have identified in the present study, reflect also conflict between the sexes. People adopt a mixed mating strategy that involves extra-pair relationships in order to increase their own at the expense of their partners’ fitness. Accordingly, as it can be seen in the “Infidelity and abuse” factor, a partner’s adoption of such strategy makes keeping the relationship difficult. Although conceptually distinct, being physically abusive loaded to the same factor as infidelity. One possible explanation is that, a male extra-pair infidelity may be coupled with physical aggression, a strategy which, in an ancestral context, could have prevented women from walking away from their unfaithful partners. The conflict between the sexes is also reflected in factors such as “Long work hours”: Being more wealthy and successful could enable individuals, especially men, to attract higher mate value long-term partners or a higher number of casual ones. In effect, people may overemphasize on their careers in order to achieve status and wealth, neglecting their current partner.

The extracted factors reflect also the adoption of a short-term mating strategy. This is more obvious in the “Not monogamous” factor, where people indicated that they were not monogamous, and as a consequence, they tended to have unsatisfactory sexual lives when they stay long in a relationship, and for this reason tend to break up easily. This factor is also reflected in the “Fading away enthusiasm”: In order to be able to adopt a short-term mating strategy, people’s romantic feelings are expected to be intense when they meet a new partner, but to reside quickly, motivating them to look for other partners. Such calibration of behavioral mechanisms would prevent people from keeping an intimate relationship.

Sex-differences were found in almost all factors, suggesting that men and women differed in how important they considered the various difficulties. As it was originally predicted, men would be more likely to adopt a short-term and a mixed mating strategy, which would cause them difficulties in keeping an intimate relationship. These difficulties were reflected in the “Not monogamous” and the “Infidelity and abuse” factors. They were also reflected in the “Fading away enthusiasm” and the “Lack of personal time and space” factors, where men gave significantly higher scores than women. For instance, as discussed in the introduction, men’s enthusiasm may fade away quickly, so that they could move on to the next partner. Also, in order to be able to have multiple partners, men would prefer to have more freedom of movement, and less control by a partner, and these preferences reflect on the “Lack of personal time and space.” As indicated by the effect size, the largest sex-difference was found for the “Lack of effort,” which also reflects this issue as items such as “My sexual interest for my partner soon fades away” loaded there. This factor may also reflect the different evolutionary histories of men and women: During most of evolutionary time, men monopolized women by force, so they may not have evolved to have high empathy and understanding of their partners’ needs.

Significant age effects were found for several factors. As indicated by the effect size, the largest difference was for the “Bad sex” and the “Long work hours” factors. Starting from the former, older participants gave higher scores than younger ones. One possible explanation is that, the more time people spend in a relationship, the more likely it is for them to get bored having sex with the same partner. Age in this case probably acts as a proxy of the length of the relationship, with older participants being more likely to be longer in an intimate relationship than younger participants. With respect to the “Long work hours” factor, we found that older participants spent more time working and less time allocating to the partners than younger participants. One possible explanation is that, as people get older, they are more likely to advance in their careers, and have then to spend more hours working and fewer hours being with their partners.

We also found that participants who had more children gave higher scores for difficulties such as their children absorbing most of their time and energy than participants with fewer or no children. This is expected, as people would allocate less resources in child-rearing and would be less likely to disagree with their partners on how to raise their daughters and sons, if they had few or no children than if they had several children. We also found that, participants who were single and divorced, gave significantly higher scores in most factors than participants who were married and in a relationship. One possible interpretation of this finding is that, individuals who experienced more difficulties, were more likely not to be in a relationship than individuals who experienced fewer difficulties. For instance, people who did not make considerable effort to keep a relationship, were not monogamous, and they felt that a relationship constrained them, were less likely to keep an intimate relationship than people who made considerable effort, were monogamous and they did not feel that a relationship constrained them. Future research needs to investigate this finding further.

The means for all factors were below the middle of the scale (i.e., “3”), suggesting that each one on its own was not causing people considerable difficulties in keeping a relationship. Yet, each mean was accompanied by a relatively large standard deviation, indicating that there was considerable variation in these difficulties, with some people finding them very constraining and others not constraining at all. On the basis of these findings, we can argue that people will experience severe difficulties in keeping a relationship when more than one factors is present. For instance, if people are quirky, have a taste for sexual variation, and lose their enthusiasm quickly, they will face severe difficulties in keeping a relationship, but people who are say only quirky, may manage to do so more smoothly. Of course, the outcome depends also on the severity of the problem; if people are for instance extremely quirky, they will face severe difficulties in keeping a relationship even in the absence of other difficulties.

As discussed above, the difficulties that people face in keeping an intimate relationship could lead to divorce. Such difficulties could cause the termination of the relationship long before it reaches the point of marriage, leading people to remain single. They may also prolong the spells of singlehood, because people who face such difficulties may had bad experiences from being in a relationship, which could demotivate them from looking to establish new ones. Actually, one study asked participants to indicate the reasons why they were single, and found that bad experiences from previous relationships was a common reason (Apostolou, 2017b). Accordingly, studying the difficulties in keeping intimate relationships is necessary for developing interventions that could enable people to maintain an intimate relationship. A proper theoretical framework for understanding these difficulties is key for this endeavor to succeed. For instance, the evolutionary theoretical framework, developed in the current paper, indicates that most of these difficulties arise from behavioral mechanisms not being well-adapted to the modern conditions rather than from behavioral mechanisms being broken. That is, in most cases of people facing difficulties in keeping an intimate relationship, there is not an underlying pathology. In turn, possible interventions should not aim to identify and “cure” a pathology, but to enable instead people to address the limitations of their behavioral adaptations, and function better in the contemporary environment.

Our research is not without limitations. To begin with, our results were based on self-report data that are subject to several biases. In particular, people may not have an accurate perception of what causes them difficulties in keeping an intimate relationship. For instance, people may fail to recognize that they are clingy, which in turn, makes keeping a relationship difficult. Furthermore, we employed a non-probability sample, so our findings cannot be readily generalized to the population. Also, although we have employed a combination of qualitative research methods in order to identify the reasons which caused people difficulties in keeping an intimate relationship, we may not have captured all of them. Moreover, the importance ascribed to these reasons may vary with the cultural context, which indicates that cross-cultural research is required for examining cultural variation. In addition, our study is explorative and was based one sample. Consequently, the next step in this research should be to employ these results and systematically develop a theoretically-driven measure, with carefully generated items, a good and a priori specified factor structure, and good measurement properties. Finally yet importantly, we did not control for sexual orientation. Given the relatively low prevalence of homosexuality and bisexuality (LeVay, 2010), we expect that our sample was predominantly heterosexual. Accordingly, our findings may not generalize to non-heterosexual individuals.

The plethora of reasons and factors that we have identified in the current research, testify to the complexity of the phenomenon. Such complexity suggests that our work is insufficient for fully understanding the difficulties that people face in keeping an intimate relationship. It should be considered thus, as the first of the many studies which are required to understand this fascinating phenomenon.

We investigate the findings that liberals and conservatives rely on different moral foundations; the foundations seem different, but results in popular sites are inflated, probably by self-selection

Kivikangas, J Matias, Belén Fernández, Simo Järvelä, Niklas Ravaja, and Jan-Erik Lönnqvist. 2020. “Moral Foundations and Political Orientation: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.” PsyArXiv. September 4. doi:10.1037/bul0000308

Abstract: We investigate the findings that liberals and conservatives rely on different moral foundations. We conducted a comprehensive literature search from major databases and other sources for primary studies that used the Moral Foundations Questionnaire and a typical measure of political orientation, a political self-placement item. We used a predefined process for independent extraction of effect sizes by two authors and ran both study-level and individual-level analyses. With 89 samples, 605 effect sizes, and 33,804 independent participants, in addition to 192,870 participants from the widely used YourMorals.org website, the basic differences about conservatives and liberals are supported. However, heterogeneity is moderate, and the results may be less generalizable than previously thought. The effect sizes obtained from the YourMorals.org data appear inflated compared to independent samples, which is partly related political interest and may be due to self-selection. The association of moral foundations to political orientation varies culturally (between regions and countries) and subculturally (between White and Black respondents an in response to political interest, but not in relation to other demographics). The associations also differ depending on the choice of the social or economic dimension and its labeling, supporting both the bidimensional model of political orientation and the findings that the dimensions are often strongly correlated. Oue findings have implications for interpreting published studies, as well as designing new ones where the political aspect of morality is relevant. The results are primarily limited by the homogeneity of the measures and included studies in terms of sample origins.

Identifying a Facial Expression of Flirtation and Its Effect on Men: Flirtatious expressions receiving low recognition by men differed in morphology from the highly recognized flirting expressions

Identifying a Facial Expression of Flirtation and Its Effect on Men. Parnia Haj-Mohamadi Omri Gillath & Erika L. Rosenberg. The Journal of Sex Research, Sep 3 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2020.1805583

Abstract: Internal states may be conveyed to others nonverbally through facial expression. We investigated the existence of a particular facial cue that may be effectively used by women to indicate interest in a man. Across six studies, men generally recognized a female facial expression as representing flirting. Flirtatious expressions receiving low recognition by men differed in morphology from the highly recognized flirting expressions. The discrepancies are indicative of individual differences among women in effectively conveying a flirtatious facial cue and among men in recognizing this cue. The morphology of the highly recognized flirtatious facial expressions, coded using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS), included: a head turned to one side and tilted down slightly, a slight smile, and eyes turned forward (toward the implied target). Results from experimental studies showed that flirtatious facial expressions, as compared with happy or neutral expressions, led to faster identification of sex words by men. These findings support the role of flirtatious expression in communication and mating initiation.

Not only do women suffer the adverse consequences of being sexually objectified, but when they are objectified, they can also experience the added negative effects associated with being partially ostracized

Dvir, M., Kelly, J. R., Tyler, J. M., & Williams, K. D. (2020). I’m up here! Sexual objectification leads to feeling ostracized. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Aug 13 2020. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000328

Abstract: Theory and research demonstrate that women are frequently the targets of sexually objectifying behavior, viewed and treated by others as mere objects for pleasure and use. When sexually objectified, attention is principally focused on scrutinizing and valuing their physical features, whereas their internal attributes (e.g., thoughts, feelings, personhood) may be largely ignored (Bartky, 1990). Although the processes and negative effects associated with sexual objectification have been examined extensively, no work has examined the “ignoring” component of sexual objectification. We reasoned that sexually objectifying a woman by ignoring and devaluing some of her personal attributes or features is akin to partial ostracism. Although sexual objectification and partial ostracism may seem to comprise opposite characteristics (i.e., attention vs. ignoring), we posit that sexually objectifying a woman, much like partial ostracism, involves ignoring some of her internal attributes (e.g., thoughts, feelings, voice). Across 4 studies, we expected and found evidence that a sexual objectification experience (vs. control conditions) resulted in women feeling sexually objectified, which led to increased feelings of ostracism, which, in turn, threatened and lowered women’s fundamental need satisfaction (i.e., belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence). Our findings suggest that not only do women suffer the adverse consequences of being sexually objectified, but when they are objectified, they can also experience the added negative effects associated with being partially ostracized, a novel finding that contributes to both the sexual objectification and ostracism literature.

Wildfire Exposure Increases Pro-Environment Voting within Democratic but Not Republican Areas

Wildfire Exposure Increases Pro-Environment Voting within Democratic but Not Republican Areas. Chad Hazlett & Matto Mildenberger. American Political Science Review, Jul 15 2020. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/wildfire-exposure-increases-proenvironment-voting-within-democratic-but-not-republican-areas/8F483913E13A44DCB975CE90024C0931

Abstract: One political barrier to climate reforms is the temporal mismatch between short-term policy costs and long-term policy benefits. Will public support for climate reforms increase as climate-related disasters make the short-term costs of inaction more salient? Leveraging variation in the timing of Californian wildfires, we evaluate how exposure to a climate-related hazard influences political behavior rather than self-reported attitudes or behavioral intentions. We show that wildfires increased support for costly, climate-related ballot measures by 5 to 6 percentage points for those living within 5 kilometers of a recent wildfire, decaying to near zero beyond a distance of 15 kilometers. This effect is concentrated in Democratic-voting areas, and it is nearly zero in Republican-dominated areas. We conclude that experienced climate threats can enhance willingness-to-act but largely in places where voters are known to believe in climate change.

Major Principles of Attachment Theory: Overview, Hypotheses, and Research Ideas. Chapter 12 of new book

Major Principles of Attachment Theory: Overview, Hypotheses, and Research Ideas. Jeffry A. Simpson, W. Steven Rholes, Jami Eller, Ramona L. Paetzold. Chp 12 in Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, Third Edition. Edited by Paul A. M. Van Lange, E. Tory Higgins, and Arie W. Kruglanski, Nov 2020. https://www.guilford.com/books/Social-Psychology/Lange-Higgins-Kruglanski/9781462543984/contents

During the past five decades, few theories in psychology have generated as much interest, research, and debate as attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969/1982, 1973, 1980, 1988) and its recent extensions (see Cassidy & Shaver, 2016). Attachment theory is an extensive, inclusive theory of personality and social development “from the cradle to the grave” (Bowlby, 1979, p. 129). Being a lifespan theory, it is relevant to several areas in psychology, including developmental, personality, social, cognitive, neuroscience, and clinical.

Because attachment theory covers the entire life course, it has several fundamental principles and core hypotheses, most of which address how and why people think, feel, and behave in particular ways within relationships at different points of their lives. Given the focus of this volume, our primary goal in this chapter is to provide a brief, representative overview of the key principles and central hypotheses that underlie attachment theory, both as originally articulated by Bowlby and his contemporaries (e.g., Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978) and as expanded upon in recent theory and research (Cassidy & Shaver, 2016).

Attachment theory has two major components: (1) a normative component, which explains modal (species-typical) attachment processes and patterns of behavior in humans, and (2) an individual-difference component, which explains individual deviations from modal processes and behavioral patterns. Most of the major principles and hypotheses we discuss in this chapter are normative ones, but we also highlight principles associated with well-established individual differences in attachment patterns (in children) and attachment orientations (in adults), including how they are related to a host of personal and relational processes and outcomes.

We began our work on this chapter by surveying the theoretical and empirical literature on attachment processes across the lifespan and generated an initial list of potential principles and hypotheses. We then asked several leading attachment scholars working in different areas of psychology (e.g., clinical, developmental, personality, social) to indicate what they thought were the most important principles/hypotheses.1