Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

Silverchair Information Systems full text link Silverchair Information Systems Free PMC article
Full text links

Actions

.2011 Feb 12;366(1563):313-24.
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0267.

Evolutionary accounts of human behavioural diversity

Affiliations

Evolutionary accounts of human behavioural diversity

Gillian R Brown et al. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci..

Abstract

Human beings persist in an extraordinary range of ecological settings, in the process exhibiting enormous behavioural diversity, both within and between populations. People vary in their social, mating and parental behaviour and have diverse and elaborate beliefs, traditions, norms and institutions. The aim of this theme issue is to ask whether, and how, evolutionary theory can help us to understand this diversity. In this introductory article, we provide a background to the debate surrounding how best to understand behavioural diversity using evolutionary models of human behaviour. In particular, we examine how diversity has been viewed by the main subdisciplines within the human evolutionary behavioural sciences, focusing in particular on the human behavioural ecology, evolutionary psychology and cultural evolution approaches. In addition to differences in focus and methodology, these subdisciplines have traditionally varied in the emphasis placed on human universals, ecological factors and socially learned behaviour, and on how they have addressed the issue of genetic variation. We reaffirm that evolutionary theory provides an essential framework for understanding behavioural diversity within and between human populations, but argue that greater integration between the subfields is critical to developing a satisfactory understanding of diversity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Summary of how the standard social science model and the subfields of the human evolutionary behavioural sciences view human behaviour. The two inheritance systems in human populations, namely, the genetic inheritance that is transmitted from one generation to the next (G) and the socially transmitted information that is present in the population at the first and second time-point, and potentially shapes the phenotype (P), are represented for two successive generations (t1 andt2). (a) The standard social science model stresses the strong influence of socially transmitted information on behaviour (thick arrows from P to P) and the lack of interaction between the two inheritance systems (broken lines between G and P). (b) Human sociobiology stresses the impact of genetic inheritance on human behaviour (thick arrows from G to P) and the relatively weak influence of socially transmitted information (thin arrows from P to P). (c) Human behavioural ecology stresses the role of the environment (E) in modulating behavioural development and eliciting alternative behaviour patterns, while still acknowledging the existence of two inheritance pathways. (d) Evolutionary psychology stresses the impact of genetic inheritance on human behaviour (thick arrows from G to P), the relatively weak influences of socially transmitted information (thin arrows from P to P), and the role of the environment (E) in eliciting alternative behavioural responses. (e) Cultural evolution theory stresses the role of socially transmitted information in human behaviour (thick arrows from P to P), while still acknowledging some role for genetic inheritance and environmental input. (f) Gene–culture coevolution stresses the role of both genetic and socially transmitted inheritance, the interactions between the two inheritance systems (two-way arrows between G and P, which are also described by niche construction theory), and the role of the environment on these interactions.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Harris M. 2001. The rise of anthropological theory: a history of theories of culture. London, UK: AltaMira Press
    1. Eysenck M. W. 1994. Individual differences: normal and abnormal. Hove, UK: Erlbaum
    1. Laland K. N., Brown G. R. 2002. Sense and nonsense: evolutionary perspectives on human behaviour. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
    1. Sear R., Lawson D. W., Dickins T. E. 2007. Synthesis in the human evolutionary behavioural sciences. J. Evol. Psychol. 5, 3–28 10.1556/JEP.2007.1019 (doi:10.1556/JEP.2007.1019) - DOI
    1. Smith E. A., Borgerhoff Mulder M., Hill K. 2001. Controversies in the evolutionary social sciences: a guide for the perplexed. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16, 128–135 10.1016/S0169-5347(00)02077-2 (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(00)02077-2) - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
Silverchair Information Systems full text link Silverchair Information Systems Free PMC article
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp