News Blog

News Blog


Notes from an evolutionary psychology conference: Why won't your daughter call?

Evo psych, HBESFULLERTON, CALIF.—If you want to wait by the phone for your next college-aged daughter's call home, you should mark the days of her menstrual cycle on your calendar.

Well, not exactly. But that was one reasonable conclusion of research presented here last week at the 21st annual conference of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society (HBES) at California State University, Fullerton, by Elizabeth Pillsworth, a graduate student in Martie Haselton's lab at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Haselton (pictured at left with David Buss of the University of Texas at Austin) studies sexual attraction, relationships, and how fertility cycles influence mate preferences and choices (for instance, women dress in a more sexually provocative manner during the high fertility phase of the month). In an interesting twist on this body of research, Pillsworth studied the effects of the fertility phase in women on the incest taboo—specifically, how often college-aged women phoned their dads (versus their moms) during the month. Wow. It never ceases to amaze me how clever scientists can be in thinking up new research paradigms: Who would have ever thought of correlating cell phone calls with estrus cycles? Pillsworth and Haselton (and their colleague Debra Lieberman) did! And the results were most revealing.

But first, some background. On the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of The Origin of Species, Darwinian principles have finally come online in mainstream psychology. HBES is the official organization of evolutionary psychologists and a champion of applying Darwinian thinking to human psychology, and its conferences seem to be gaining steam. The last HBES meeting I attended was at the University of California, Santa Barbara, in 1995, and it was sparsely attended. This year, 450-plus attendees packed the tiny conference rooms.

Now to Pillsworth's research: Kin affiliation in evolution is critical for predator avoidance, food procurement and sharing, protection from the elements, and so on. That is, being in a family group is extremely important for mammals. But there is an equally important downside: inbreeding. If you mate with people who are genetically similar to you, there are consequences: higher rates of infant mortality, deformed sperm, sterility, and genetic defects of all sorts—think hemophilia in the royal families of Europe in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Research shows that the offspring of first cousins are twice as likely to suffer congenital malformation and genetic disease and face up to a 5 percent increase in mortality; the offspring of siblings show a 45 percent increased risk of mortality.

Thus, mammals evolved numerous adaptations for inbreeding avoidance: dispersal from natal groups (usually sex-biased), kin recognition and avoidance, and a preference for extra-pair or extra-group copulations rather than copulating within one's group. Pillsworth cited a study on horses that found that mares only leave their group temporarily to join other breeding groups. So there is a conflict of wanting to be close to your kin and kind, but not too close.

The researchers' hypothesis on incest avoidance was that near ovulation, women are motivated to avoid affiliation with male kin (fathers) but not mothers, to avoid the potential costs of inbreeding. Their predictions were that relative to low-fertility days, on high-fertility days women would initiate fewer calls and engage in shorter conversations with fathers, compared to mothers.

They had 51 normally-ovulating women (mean age 19.1 years old) provide complete cell phone bills from one month, along with their menstrual cycle information and details about individuals on their phone bill. It turned out that the subjects called their fathers significantly less than their mothers during high fertility days, and when both mothers and fathers called them during high fertility days they spent less time on the phone with their dads than with their moms.

Conclusion: "this is the first evidence of adaptation in human females to avoid affiliation with male kin when fertility is at its highest."
   
This study was of particular interest to me because I have a 17-year-old daughter who will be going off to college in a little over a year. Like most parents, I am dreading the day she is gone, when I'll lose my daily contact with her, and am hoping that she calls regularly. I guess I will have to make a mental note of her high-fertility days and expect fewer calls from her—but being that I'm her dad, that won't stop me from calling her and stalling on the phone just to mess with her evolved psychology! Of course, an alternative explanation is that we dads tend to be a bit controlling on matters of our daughters and the boys that love them, and so perhaps daughters avoid talking to their dads during those high-fertility days when they are more inclined to, well, you know ... do things that we dads don't want them to. So instead of “incest avoidance,” an alternative hypothesis might be “controlling dad avoidance.”

Photo of evolutionary psychologists David Buss (left) and Martie Haselton (right) at the HBES conference: Michael Shermer

Tags: evolutionary psychology, HBES conference, evolution
More News Blog: Next: 9,000-year-old brew hitting the shelves this summer Previous: Can a carbon market really save the orangutan?

22 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. hotblack 02:26 PM 6/5/09

    That has to be the worst opening paragraph I've ever read.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. coolmoss 02:57 PM 6/5/09

    Science in motion; gotta love it! What's more it's evolution in motion; gotta love what others hate. I'm pleased as punch.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. krabcat in reply to hotblack 04:11 PM 6/5/09

    @hotblack: it caught your attention though.

    I thought this would go in the opposite direction at first because "the results were most revealing."

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. royniles 05:37 PM 6/5/09

    The subject matter of the conversation will be effected by someone's physical and emotional state. and may have nothing to do with considerations of incest, especially if the subject matter is of more interest to a woman (mother) than a man (father). Daughters discuss their feelings during menstrual periods almost exclusively with other women.
    There's also the embarrassment factor, etc., etc., etc. Evo psych is an "scientific" enterprise.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. royniles 05:40 PM 6/5/09

    What I actually wrote above was that evo psych was an all hat no cattle "scientific" enterprise.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. ralphskinner@hotmail.com 06:08 PM 6/5/09

    A follow up could be to do the same trial on a group of daughters who are on the oral contraceptive pill, who do not ovulate and who have artificial levels of hormones.
    If the hypothesis is correct there should be a difference between this latter group and those in the study

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  7. 7. royniles in reply to ralphskinner@hotmail.com 06:41 PM 6/5/09

    That would be getting a bit too close to doing real science.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  8. 8. undrgrndgirl 05:57 PM 6/6/09

    they're basing their conclusions on information provided by 51 women for ONE MONTH?? sorry, but that's not science...

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  9. 9. Skeptikor 09:20 PM 6/7/09

    "What I actually wrote above was that evo psych was an all hat no cattle "scientific" enterprise."

    royniles: You're not saying that when the well is durned near dry as a squirrel's hoof the mares in the north forty won't be grazing on no spring barley till spring comes in October? Speak English, man. This is a science thread.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  10. 10. royniles in reply to Skeptikor 10:18 PM 6/7/09

    The study was done in Texas. Nuff said?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  11. 11. brerlou 04:13 PM 6/8/09

    I hate this, and I hate that it does explain puzzling variations in behavior. There's such a thing as too much information. Well this is a forum for science. Unfortunately the data on 50 subjects is not conclusive, so it seems we're going to be hearing more about this again.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  12. 12. brerlou in reply to royniles 04:31 PM 6/8/09

    "Daughters discuss their feelings during menstrual periods almost exclusively with other women.
    There's also the embarrassment factor ...""royniles"

    Fyi roy: The study was related to the menstrual cycle, not menstruation per se. Actually it was more concerned with their fertile period, not their "menstrual period."

    If the embarassment factor did play a part it would have more caused by having to chat with dad when feeling horny. But feeling horny probably wouldn't cause embarssment, it would just make dear old dad seem about as interesting as a bump on a log.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  13. 13. royniles in reply to brerlou 05:07 PM 6/8/09

    You're entitled to your opinion, but substituting opinion for scientific examination is what gets evo psych people their reputation as being little more than neo behaviorists.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  14. 14. choppam 07:57 AM 6/9/09

    Wow, some people really hate hearing about unconscious behaviour patterns. I bet they get a heart attack just thinking about their heart beating without them telling it to.

    Or thinking happening without them ordering a thought to be thunk. Or seeing, or hearing. Whatever.

    But of course, reproductive and kin behaviour is culturally determined. Says "our" current culture.

    Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque recurret...

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  15. 15. DJinBoston 06:18 PM 6/15/09

    I agree with udrgrndgril and ralph skinner above. This is much too small a sample size and time period for strong conclusions. And comparisons with a control group using the pill would be useful. When the experiment was first being explained, I thought the period of time would be at least a semester. I suppose budgetary considerations kept this very small. Now that there is some indication of possible validity, how about a better study?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  16. 16. Ruth Rosin 12:48 AM 6/16/09

    The problem with evolutionary psychologists is that they don't think! They are simply too busy making up "just so" stories!

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  17. 17. Ruth Rosin 12:55 AM 6/16/09

    The problem with evolutionary psychologists is that they don't think. They are simply too busy making up "just so" stories!

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  18. 18. pradhangeorge 01:26 PM 6/16/09

    no, 50 women / one month are not enuf. can they wait for at least a thousand femme and one year to get to the conclusions?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  19. 19. pradhangeorge 01:46 PM 6/16/09

    secondly they can also study at the same time the opposite phenomena of attraction between kith during and beyond the unsafe period of the cycle.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  20. 20. seawriter 10:08 PM 6/22/09

    OR--if you want to know when your daughter might call, you could try calling her. There's no government funding required to figure that one out.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  21. 21. ranju 11:08 AM 7/15/09

    I now partially understand why Million Dollar Baby got oscar for best movie and the kind of reactive attachment we all have with our parents. But what is the solution. I think our parents need us in our old age.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  22. 22. dawid2011ed 05:13 AM 3/27/11

    This study is indeed true but against of what the author had stated, I will not wait or supervise with her menstrual cycle. As a parent, I will do my duties of what must have to do.

    <a href="http://www.stirling-manor.com/conference-venue.html/"><b>conference venue</b></a>

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

Tweets could not be retrieved at this time

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Notes from an evolutionary psychology conference: Why won't your daughter call?: Scientific American Blog

X
Scientific American MIND iPad

Tap into your MIND

Get Both Print & Tablet Editions for one low price!

Subscribe Now >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X

About the Bering in Mind Blog

In this column presented by Scientific American Mind magazine, research psychologist Jesse Bering of Queen's University Belfast ponders some of the more obscure aspects of everyday human behavior. Ever wonder why yawning is contagious, why we point with our index fingers instead of our thumbs or whether being breastfed as an infant influences your sexual preferences as an adult? Get a closer look at the latest data as "Bering in Mind" tackles these and other quirky questions about human nature. Sign up for the RSS feed or friend Dr. Bering on Facebook and never miss an installment again.

X

About the Cross-check Blog

Every week, John Horgan takes a puckish, provocative look at breaking science. A former staff writer at Scientific American, he is the author of several books—most notably, The End of Science: Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of the Scientific Age. He currently directs the Center for Science Writings at Stevens Institute of Technology. He lives in New York State's Hudson Highlands, where he plays ice hockey each winter to hone his cross-checking skills.

X

Expeditions Blog

Ever wonder what it's really like to be working in Antarctica or collecting core samples from the middle of the Pacific Ocean? Get a first-hand feel for scientific exploration by following the blog posts of researchers out in the field.

X

About the Extinction Countdown Blog

Several times a week, John Platt shines a light on endangered species from all over the globe, exploring not just why they are dying out but also what's being done to rescue them from oblivion. From unusual or little-known organisms like the giant spitting earthworm and the stinking hawk's-beard to popular favorites like cheetahs and koalas, Platt, a journalist specializing in environmental issues and technology, does his part to slow the countdown.

X

About the Guest Blog

The editors of Scientific American regularly encounter perspectives on science and technology that we believe our readers would find thought-provoking, fascinating, debatable and challenging. The guest blog is a forum for such opinions. The views expressed belong to the author and are not necessarily shared by Scientific American.

X

About the Solar at Home Blog

Follow Scientific American editor George Musser as he installs--or tries to install--solar photovoltaic panels on the roof of his suburban New Jersey home. You'll learn the literal nuts and bolts of going green with the sun and get energy-saving tips even if you aren't putting up panels.

Write to us with tips or comments at blog@sciam.com and follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sciam.

X