Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T20:00:24.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implications of instrumental and ritual stances for traditionalism–threat responsivity relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2022

Theodore Samore Open the ORCID record for Theodore Samore [Opens in a new window]  and
Daniel M. T. Fessler Open the ORCID record for Daniel M. T. Fessler [Opens in a new window]
Theodore Samore
Affiliation:
Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture and Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA [email protected]://www.theosamore.com/
Daniel M. T. Fessler
Affiliation:
Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture, and Department of Anthropology, Bedari Kindness Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, [email protected]://www.danielmtfessler.com/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Jagiello et al.'s bifocal stance theory provides a useful theoretical framework for attempting to understand the connection between greater adherence to traditional norms and greater sensitivity to threats in the world. Here, we examine the implications of the instrumental and ritual stances with regard to various evolutionary explanations for traditionalism–threat sensitivity linkages.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e267
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barrett, H. C. (2015). The shape of thought: How mental adaptations evolve. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claessens, S., Fischer, K., Chaudhuri, A., Sibley, C. G., & Atkinson, Q. D. (2020). The dual evolutionary foundations of political ideology. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(4), 336–345. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0850-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duckitt, J., Bizumic, B., Krauss, S. W., & Heled, E. (2010). A tripartite approach to right-wing authoritarianism: The authoritarianism–conservatism–traditionalism model. Political Psychology, 31(5), 685–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00781.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fessler, D. M. T., Pisor, A. C., & Holbrook, C. (2017). Political orientation predicts credulity regarding putative hazards. Psychological Science, 28(5), 651–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617692108CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N. J., Mortensen, C., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(2), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.281CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gul, P., Kupfer, T., Elmas, P., Kose, E. A., Koskun, T., & Keesmekers, N. (2021). Disease avoidance motives trade-off against social motives, especially mate-seeking, to predict social distancing: Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ftr94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J. (2011). A cultural species: How culture drove human evolution. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/e519392012-002Google Scholar
Hibbing, J. R., Smith, K. B., & Alford, J. R. (2014). Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37(3), 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x13001192CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163600CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McElreath, R., Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2003). Shared norms and the evolution of ethnic markers. Current Anthropology, 44(1), 122–129. https://doi.org/10.1086/345689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, D. R., Fessler, D. M. T., Kerry, N., White, C., & Marin, M. (2017). The kiss of death: Three tests of the relationship between disease threat and ritualized physical contact within traditional cultures. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.06.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, D. R., & Schaller, M. (2012). Threat(s) and conformity deconstructed: Perceived threat of infectious disease and its implications for conformist attitudes and behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(2), 180–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samore, T., Fessler, D. M. T., Sparks, A. M., Holbrook, C., Aarøe, L., Baeza, C. G., … Wang, X. T. (2022). Greater traditionalism predicts COVID-19 precautionary behaviors across 27 societies. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mduw8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samore, T., Fessler, D. M. T., Holbrook, C., & Sparks, A. M. (2018). Electoral fortunes reverse, mindsets do not. PLoS ONE, 13(12), e0208653. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208653CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samore, T., Fessler, D. M. T., Sparks, A. M., & Holbrook, C. (2021). Of pathogens and party lines: Social conservatism positively associates with COVID-19 precautions among U.S. Democrats but not Republicans. PLoS ONE, 16(6), e0253326. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tybur, J. M., Inbar, Y., Aarøe, L., Barclay, P., Barlow, F. K., Barra, M., … Žeželj, I. (2016). Parasite stress and pathogen avoidance relate to distinct dimensions of political ideology across 30 nations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(44), 12408–12413. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1607398113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tybur, J. M., Lieberman, D., Fan, L., Kupfer, T. R., & de Vries, R. E. (2020). Behavioral immune trade-offs: Interpersonal value relaxes social pathogen avoidance. Psychological Science, 31(10), 1211–1221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620960011CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitehouse, H. (2011). The coexistence problem in psychology, anthropology, and evolutionary theory: Commentary on Evans & Lane, Harris, Legare & Visala, and Subbotsky. Human Development, 54(3), 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwirner, E., & Thornton, A. (2015). Cognitive requirements of cumulative culture: Teaching is useful but not essential. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 16781. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16781CrossRefGoogle Scholar