Freitag, 13. Februar 2015

Stay or stray? Evidence for alternative mating strategy phenotypes in both men and women

Stay or stray? Evidence for alternative mating strategy phenotypes in both men and women
Rafael Wlodarski , John Manning , R. I. M. Dunbar (2015)


Abstract

In all comparative analyses, humans always fall on the borderline between obligate monogamy and polygamy. Here, we use behavioural indices (sociosexuality) and anatomical indices (prenatal testosterone exposure indexed by 2D : 4D digit ratio) from three human populations to show that this may be because there are two distinct phenotypes in both sexes. While males are more promiscuous and display higher prenatal testosterone exposure than females overall, our analyses also suggest that the within-sex variation of these variables is best described by two underlying mixture models, suggesting the presence of two phenotypes with a monogamous/promiscuous ratio that slightly favours monogamy in females and promiscuity in males. The presence of two phenotypes implies that mating strategy might be under complex frequency-dependent selection.




















Donnerstag, 12. Februar 2015

Sex differences in preferences for humor: A replication, modification, and extension

Sex differences in preferences for humor: A replication, modification, and extension
Liana S. E. Hone, William Hurwitz, Debra Lieberman; (2015)


Abstract

Evolutionary-minded scientists have proposed that humor is a sexually selected trait in men that signals mate quality. Indeed, women tend to prefer men who make them laugh and men tend to prefer women who laugh at their jokes. However, it is unclear how robust this pattern is. Here we report a replication of one of the first studies (Bressler, Martin, and Balshine, 2006) to examine the sex differences in preferences for humor receptivity versus humor production. We replicate Bressler et al.’s (2006) findings that men prefer women who are receptive to their humor whereas women prefer men who produce humor. These findings held even after we modified Bressler et al.’s questionnaire for better conceptual validity. Furthermore, using a separate measure designed to assess trade-offs, we found that men viewed humor receptivity as a necessity and humor production as a luxury when they were asked to create an ideal long-term partner. For women, it was just the opposite. These results bolster the claim that sexual selection has shaped sex differences regarding preferences for a prospective mate’s sense of humor and that what one means by “sense of humor” can vary.

Dienstag, 10. Februar 2015

I will be busy in the following months. So probably I won't be much around. Thanks for following my blog!

Samstag, 7. Februar 2015

>Spearman characterized the most g-loaded tests essentially as those requiring the subject to grasp relationships - “the eduction of relations and correlates.” That is all perfectly correct. But now we can go further. The g factor is manifested in tests to the degree that they involve mental manipulation of the input elements (“fundaments” in Spearman's terminology), choice, decision, invention in contrast to reproduction, reproduction in contrast to selection, meaningful memory in contrast to rote memory, long-term memory in contrast to short-term memory, and distinguishing relevant information from irrelevant information in solving complex problems.<

Arthur Jensen (1980)

Mittwoch, 4. Februar 2015

>over the past twenty years, I have heard comments from teachers in predominantly black schools that their own teaching style has been shaped to a large extent by the particular style of instruction that seemed to work best with their pupils. The teaching style these teachers described is about what one would expect if one wished to promote the learning of scholastic material by pupils whose Level I ability is notably stronger than their Level II ability. The teaching style is shaped in the direction of greater emphasis on rote learning of basic information, frequent rehearsal of immediately past learned material, verbal repetition, and memorization. And the instruction tends to deemphasize intellectualized explanations involving abstractions, generalizations, concepts, and principles - in short, the very cognitive activities that most characterize Level II. These kinds of observations have come from experienced teachers who had never heard of the Levels theory or of Spearman's g.<

Arthur Jensen (1993)