Instruct: Given a question, retrieve passages that answer the question.
Query: Who identified inclusive fitness theory?
Inclusive fitness theory, first proposed by W. D. Hamilton in the early 1960s, gives a selection criterion for evolution of social traits when social behavior is costly to an individual organism's survival and reproduction. This behavior could emerge under conditions such that the statistical likelihood that benefits accrue to the survival and reproduction of other organisms whom also carry the social trait. Inclusive fitness theory is a general treatment of the statistical probabilities of social traits accruing to any other organisms likely to propagate a copy of the same social trait. Kin selection theory treats the narrower but simpler case of the benefits to close genetic relatives (or what biologists call 'kin') who may also carry and propagate the trait. A significant group of biologists support inclusive fitness as the explanation for social behavior in a wide range of species, as supported by experimental data. An article was published in "Nature" with over a hundred coauthors.
Michigan State University, Kellogg Biological Station: Eminent Ecologist (1992)
Donald Symons (born 1942) is an American anthropologist best known as one of the founders of evolutionary psychology, and for pioneering the study of human sexuality from an evolutionary perspective. He is one of the most cited researchers in contemporary sex research. His work is referenced by scientists investigating an extremely diverse range of sexual phenomena. Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker describes Symons' "The Evolution of Human Sexuality" (1979) as a "groundbreaking book" and "a landmark in its synthesis of evolutionary biology, anthropology, physiology, psychology, fiction, and cultural analysis, written with a combination of rigor and wit. It was a model for all subsequent books that apply evolution to human affairs, particularly mine."
The history of evolutionary psychology began with Charles Darwin, who said that humans have social instincts that evolved by natural selection. Darwin's work inspired later psychologists such as William James and Sigmund Freud but for most of the 20th century psychologists focused more on behaviorism and proximate explanations for human behavior. E. O. Wilson's landmark 1975 book, "", synthesized recent theoretical advances in evolutionary theory to explain social behavior in animals, including humans. Jerome Barkow, Leda Cosmides and John Tooby popularized the term "evolutionary psychology" in their 1992 book "The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and The Generation of Culture". Like sociobiology before it, evolutionary psychology has been embroiled in controversy, but evolutionary psychologists see their field as gaining increased acceptance overall.
Bertil Ohlin first explained the theory in a book published in 1933. Ohlin wrote the book alone, but he credited Heckscher as co-developer of the model because of his earlier work on the problem, and because many of the ideas in the final model came from Ohlin's doctoral thesis, supervised by Heckscher.
The theoretical foundations of evolutionary psychology are discussed in the introduction, by Cosmides, Tooby and Barkow, in an essay by Tooby and Cosmides on "The Psychological Foundations of Culture", and an essay by anthropologist Donald Symons "On the Use and Misuse of Darwinism in the Study of Human Behavior". The book also includes empirical research papers meant to introduce topics of interest in evolutionary psychology, such as mating, social and developmental psychology, and perceptual adaptations. It includes contributions from evolutionary psychologists such as Steven Pinker, David Buss, Martin Daly, and Margo Wilson.
John Tooby, the founder of MacDonald's field of evolutionary psychology, criticized MacDonald in an article for "Salon" in 2000. He wrote, "MacDonald's ideas—not just on Jews—violate fundamental principles of the field." Tooby posits that MacDonald is not an evolutionary psychologist, and advocates models incorporating group-selection theory, a view of natural selection whose importance is disputed.
Natural selection most generally makes nature the measure against which individuals and individual traits, are more or less likely to survive. "Nature" in this sense refers to an ecosystem, that is, a system in which organisms interact with every other element, physical as well as biological, in their local environment. Eugene Odum, a founder of ecology, defined an ecosystem as: "Any unit that includes all of the organisms...in a given area interacting with the physical environment so that a flow of energy leads to clearly defined trophic structure, biotic diversity, and material cycles (i.e., exchange of materials between living and nonliving parts) within the system..." Each population within an ecosystem occupies a distinct niche, or position, with distinct relationships to other parts of the system. These relationships involve the life history of the organism, its position in the food chain and its geographic range. This broad understanding of nature enables scientists to delineate specific forces which, together, comprise natural selection.
Ecological Society of America: editorial board (1977–present)
The term "evolutionary psychology" was used by American biologist Michael Ghiselin in a 1973 article published in the journal "Science". Jerome Barkow, Leda Cosmides and John Tooby popularized the term "evolutionary psychology" in their 1992 book "The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and The Generation of Culture".
Michael L. Rosenzweig (1941–present) created and popularized Reconciliation ecology, which began with his theory that designated nature preserves would not be enough land to conserve the biodiversity of Earth, as humans have used so much land that they have negatively impacted biogeochemical cycles and had other ecological impacts that have negatively affected species compositions.Michael Rosenzweig's idea of reconciliation ecology was developed based on existing research, which was conducted on the principle first suggested by Alexander von Humboldt stating that larger areas of land will have increased species diversity as compared to smaller areas. This research focused on species-area relationships (SPARs) and the different scales on which they exist, ranging from sample-area to interprovincial SPARs. Steady-state dynamics in diversity gave rise to these SPARs, which are now used to measure the reduction of species diversity on Earth. In response to this decline in diversity, Rosenzweig's reconciliation ecology was born.
For example, newly dominant male lions often kill cubs in the pride that they did not sire. This behavior is adaptive because killing the cubs eliminates competition for their own offspring and causes the nursing females to come into heat faster, thus allowing more of his genes to enter into the population. Sociobiologists would view this instinctual cub-killing behavior as being inherited through the genes of successfully reproducing male lions, whereas non-killing behavior may have died out as those lions were less successful in reproducing.
The Heckscher-Ohlin model (H-O model), also known as the "factors proportions development", is a general equilibrium mathematical model of international trade, developed by Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin at the Stockholm School of Economics. It builds on David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage by predicting patterns of commerce and production based on the factor endowments of a trading region. The model essentially says that countries will export products that utilize their abundant and cheap factor(s) of production and import products that utilize the countries' scarce factor(s).
The original Heckscher–Ohlin model and extended model such as the Vanek model performs poorly, as it is shown in the section "Econometric testing of H–O model theorems". Daniel Trefler and Susan Chun Zhu summarizes their paper that "It is hard to believe that factor endowments theory [editor's note: in other words, Heckscher–Ohlin–Vanek Model] could offer an adequate explanation of international trade patterns".
Notable contributions came from Paul Samuelson, Ronald Jones, and Jaroslav Vanek, so that variations of the model are sometimes called the Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson model or the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek model in the neo-classical economics.
The "cultural cognition hypothesis" holds that individuals are motivated by a variety of psychological processes to form beliefs about putatively dangerous activities that match their cultural evaluations of them. Persons who subscribe to relatively individualistic values, for example, tend to value commerce and industry and are inclined to disbelieve that such activities pose serious environmental risks. Persons who subscribe to relatively egalitarian and communitarian values, in contrast, readily credit claims of environmental risks, which is consistent with their moral suspicion of commerce and industry as sources of inequality and symbols of excessive self-seeking.
He developed, in the early 1960s, the first algorithm for discerning phylogenetic relationships among species based upon their respective character states observed over a set of characters. This work was honored by James Farris and Arnold Kluge in their later appellation of related algorithms as "Wagner parsimony."
Ehrenfels argued in numerous cultural-scientific and sexual-political writings against the cultural harmfulness of monogamy and for the utopia of a polygynian social order. He defended the opinion that monogamy would hinder a Darwinistic reproduction-logic and procreation-selection, which would have a devastating effect on society in a cultural-biological way and therefore monogamy should be combated. With those theories, Ehrenfels exposed himself to massive criticism, because he offered with his theories unimaginable thoughts to contemporary Western conventions. The basis of Ehrenfels's thinking about a new sexual order were expressed in a series of essays published in several academic journals in Germany and Austria between 1902-1910. In his essays, Ehrenfels began with the argument that men are not naturally monogamous, and that monogamy was something that had come to Europe with Christianity. Ehrenfels's starting point was that with many species of animals such as whales, walruses, elephants, lions, etc, the strongest male has a harem, which for him was sufficient proof that this was what nature had intended for humanity. Ehrenfels stated through monogamy had some useful functions such as the "iron discipline" it imposed on European men, on the whole Europeans had suffered terribly from the unnatural condition of monogamy, which had seriously interfered with the Darwinian progress of ensuring the survival of the fittest (Ehrenfels was an avid Social Darwinist). Ehrenfels believed polygamy was what nature had intended for men as it allowed the "fittest" men to father as many children as possible with as many women as possible in a process of "virile selection".
Fechner, along with Wilhelm Wundt and Hermann von Helmholtz, is recognized as one of the founders of modern experimental psychology. His clearest contribution was the demonstration that because the mind was susceptible to measurement and mathematical treatment, psychology had the potential to become a quantified science. Theorists such as Immanuel Kant had long stated that this was impossible, and that therefore, a science of psychology was also impossible.
Group D
Francis Galton (1822–1911) was a pioneer in investigating both eminent human achievement and mental testing. In his book "Hereditary Genius", writing before the development of IQ testing, he proposed that hereditary influences on eminent achievement are strong, and that eminence is rare in the general population. Lewis Terman chose near' genius or genius" as the classification label for the highest classification on his 1916 version of the Stanford–Binet test. By 1926, Terman began publishing about a longitudinal study of California schoolchildren who were referred for IQ testing by their schoolteachers, called Genetic Studies of Genius, which he conducted for the rest of his life. Catherine M. Cox, a colleague of Terman's, wrote a whole book, "The Early Mental Traits of 300 Geniuses", published as volume 2 of "The Genetic Studies of Genius" book series, in which she analyzed biographical data about historic geniuses. Although her estimates of childhood IQ scores of historical figures who never took IQ tests have been criticized on methodological grounds, Cox's study was thorough in finding out what else matters besides IQ in becoming a genius. By the 1937 second revision of the Stanford–Binet test, Terman no longer used the term "genius" as an IQ classification, nor has any subsequent IQ test. In 1939, Wechsler wrote "we are rather hesitant about calling a person a genius on the basis of a single intelligence test score."
Darwinian anthropology was critiqued by Symonds for its agnosticism as to the psychological mechanisms governing how social behavior is actually expressed in the human species, and its reliance on interpreting inclusive fitness theory to simply imply that "humans have evolved to be inclusive fitness maximizers". This section will review some of the relevant background discussion in inclusive fitness theory to clarify why this position was considered untenable.
Early developments of biological inclusive fitness theory and the derivative field of Sociobiology, encouraged some sociobiologists and evolutionary psychologists to approach human kinship with the assumption that inclusive fitness theory predicts that kinship relations in humans "are indeed" expected to depend on genetic relatedness, which they readily connected with the "genealogy" approach of early anthropologists such as Morgan (see above sections). However, this is the position that Schneider, Sahlins and other anthropologists explicitly reject.
The aim of the book is to show that ""properly interpreted, cultural anthropology approaches (and ethnographic data) and biological approaches are perfectly compatible regarding processes of social bonding in humans."" Holland's position is based on demonstrating that the dominant biological theory of social behavior (inclusive fitness theory) is typically misunderstood to predict that genetic ties are necessary for the "expression" of social behaviors, whereas in fact the theory only implicates genetic associations as necessary for the "evolution" of social behaviors. Whilst rigorous evolutionary biologists have long understood the distinction between these levels of analysis (see Tinbergen's four questions), past attempts to apply inclusive fitness theory to humans have often overlooked the distinction between "evolution" and "expression".
Whilst the above understanding of inclusive fitness theory as necessarily making predictions about how human kinship and altruism is mediated is common amongst evolutionary psychologists, other biologists and anthropologists have argued that it is at best a limited (and at worst a mistaken) understanding of inclusive fitness theory. These scientists argue that the theory is better understood as simply describing an "evolutionary" criterion for the emergence of altruistic behaviour, which is explicitly statistical in character, not as predictive of "proximate" or "mediating" mechanisms of altruistic behaviour, which may not necessarily be determined by genetic relatedness (or blood ties) "per se". These alternative non-deterministic and non-reductionist understandings of inclusive fitness theory and human behavior have been argued to be compatible with anthropologists' decades of data on human kinship, and compatible with anthropologists' perspectives on human kinship. This position (e.g. nurture kinship) has been largely accepted by social anthropologists, whilst the former position (still held by evolutionary psychologists, see above) remains rejected by social anthropologists.