Greater traditionalism predicts COVID-19 precautionary behaviors across 27 societies.

People vary both in their embrace of their society's traditions, and in their perception of hazards as salient and necessitating a response. Over evolutionary time, traditions have offered avenues for addressing hazards, plausibly resulting in linkages between orientations toward tradition and orientations toward danger. Emerging research documents connections between traditionalism and threat responsivity, including pathogen-avoidance motivations. Additionally, because hazard-mitigating behaviors can conflict with competing priorities, associations between traditionalism and pathogen avoidance may hinge on contextually contingent tradeoffs. The COVID-19 pandemic provides a real-world test of the posited relationship between traditionalism and hazard avoidance. Across 27 societies (N = 7844), we find that, in a majority of countries, individuals' endorsement of tradition positively correlates with their adherence to costly COVID-19-avoidance behaviors; accounting for some of the conflicts that arise between public health precautions and other objectives further strengthens this evidence that traditionalism is associated with greater attention to hazards.

Coalitionality shapes moral elevation: evidence from the U.S. Black Lives Matter protest and counter-protest movements.

Witnessing altruistic behaviour can elicit moral elevation, an emotion that motivates prosocial cooperation. This emotion is evoked more strongly when the observer anticipates that other people will be reciprocally cooperative. Coalitionality should therefore moderate feelings of elevation, as whether the observer shares the coalitional affiliation of those observed should influence the observer's assessment of the likelihood that the latter will cooperate with the observer. We examined this thesis in studies contemporaneous with the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests. Although BLM protests were predominantly peaceful, they were depicted by conservative media as destructive and antisocial. In two large-scale, pre-registered online studies (total N = 2172), political orientation strongly moderated feelings of state elevation elicited by a video of a peaceful BLM protest (Studies 1 and 2) or a peaceful Back the Blue (BtB) counter-protest (Study 2). Political conservatism predicted less elevation following the BLM video and more elevation following the BtB video. Elevation elicited by the BLM video correlated with preferences to defund police, whereas elevation elicited by the BtB video correlated with preferences to increase police funding. These findings extend prior work on elevation into the area of prosocial cooperation in the context of coalitional conflict.

No effect of 'watching eyes': An attempted replication and extension investigating individual differences.

Some evidence suggests that people behave more cooperatively and generously when observed or in the presence of images of eyes (termed the 'watching eyes' effect). Eye images are thought to trigger feelings of observation, which in turn motivate people to behave more cooperatively to earn a good reputation. However, several recent studies have failed to find evidence of the eyes effect. One possibility is that inconsistent evidence in support of the eyes effect is a product of individual differences in sensitivity or susceptibility to the cue. In fact, some evidence suggests that people who are generally more prosocial are less susceptible to situation-specific reputation-based cues of observation. In this paper, we sought to (1) replicate the eyes effect, (2) replicate the past finding that people who are dispositionally less prosocial are more responsive to observation than people who are more dispositionally more prosocial, and (3) determine if this effect extends to the watching eyes effect. Results from a pre-registered study showed that people did not give more money in a dictator game when decisions were made public or in the presence of eye images, even though participants felt more observed when decisions were public. That is, we failed to replicate the eyes effect and observation effect. An initial, but underpowered, interaction model suggests that egoists give less than prosocials in private, but not public, conditions. This suggests a direction for future research investigating if and how individual differences in prosociality influence observation effects.

The skin crawls, the stomach turns: ectoparasites and pathogens elicit distinct defensive responses in humans.

Disgust has long been viewed as a primary motivator of defensive responses to threats posed by both microscopic pathogens and macroscopic ectoparasites. Although disgust can defend effectively against pathogens encountered through ingestion or incidental contact, it offers limited protection against ectoparasites, which actively pursue a host and attach to its surface. Humans might, therefore, possess a distinct ectoparasite defence system-including cutaneous sensory mechanisms and grooming behaviours-functionally suited to guard the body's surface. In two US studies and one in China, participants (N = 1079) viewed a range of ectoparasite- and pathogen-relevant video stimuli and reported their feelings, physiological sensations, and behavioural motivations. Participants reported more surface-guarding responses towards ectoparasite stimuli than towards pathogen stimuli, and more ingestion/contamination-reduction responses towards pathogen stimuli than towards ectoparasite stimuli. Like other species, humans appear to possess evolved psychobehavioural ectoparasite defence mechanisms that are distinct from pathogen defence mechanisms.

Of pathogens and party lines: Social conservatism positively associates with COVID-19 precautions among U.S. Democrats but not Republicans.

Social liberals tend to be less pathogen-avoidant than social conservatives, a pattern consistent with a model wherein ideological differences stem from differences in threat reactivity. Here we investigate if and how individual responses to a shared threat reflect those patterns of ideological difference. In seeming contradiction to the general association between social conservatism and pathogen avoidance, the more socially conservative political party in the United States has more consistently downplayed the dangers of COVID-19 during the ongoing pandemic. This puzzle offers an opportunity to examine the contributions of multiple factors to disease avoidance. We investigated the relationship between social conservatism and COVID-19 precautionary behavior in light of the partisan landscape of the United States. We explored whether consumption of, and attitudes toward, different sources of information, as well as differential evaluation of various threats caused by the pandemic-such as direct health costs versus indirect harms to the economy and individual liberties-shape partisan differences in responses to the pandemic in ways that overwhelm the contributions of social conservatism. In two pre-registered studies, socially conservative attitudes correlate with self-reported COVID-19 prophylactic behaviors, but only among Democrats. Reflecting larger societal divisions, among Republicans and Independents, the absence of a positive relationship between social conservatism and COVID-19 precautions appears driven by lower trust in scientists, lower trust in liberal and moderate sources, lesser consumption of liberal news media, and greater economic conservatism.

Live fast, die young and sleep later: Life history strategy and human sleep behavior.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Life History Theory (LHT) describes trade-offs that organisms make with regard to three investment pathways: growth, maintenance and reproduction. In light of the reparative functions of sleep, we examine sleep behaviors and corresponding attitudes as proximate manifestations of an individual's underlying relative prioritization of short-term reproduction versus long-term maintenance. METHODOLOGY: We collected survey data from 568 participants across two online studies having different participant pools. We use a mixture of segmented and hierarchical regression models, structural equation modeling and machine learning to infer relationships between sleep duration/quality, attitudes about sleep and biodemographic/psychometric measures of life history strategy (LHS). RESULTS: An age-mediated U- or V-shaped relationship appears when LHS is plotted against habitual sleep duration, with the fastest strategies occupying the sections of the curve with the highest mortality risk: < 6.5 hr (short sleep) and > 8.5 hr (long sleep). LH 'fastness' is associated with increased sleepiness and worse overall sleep quality: delayed sleep onset latency, more wakefulness after sleep onset, higher sleep-wake instability and greater sleep duration variability. Hedonic valuations of sleep may mediate the effects of LHS on certain sleep parameters. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The costs of deprioritizing maintenance can be parameterized in the domain of sleep, where 'life history fastness' corresponds with sleep patterns associated with greater senescence and mortality. Individual differences in sleep having significant health implications can thus be understood as components of lifelong trajectories likely stemming from calibration to developmental circumstances. Relatedly, hedonic valuations of sleep may constitute useful avenues for non-pharmacological management of chronic sleep disorders.Lay Summary: Sleep is essential because it allows the body to repair and maintain itself. But time spent sleeping is time that cannot be spent doing other things. People differ in how much they prioritize immediate rewards, including sociosexual opportunities, versus long-term goals. In this research, we show that individual differences in sleep behaviors, and attitudes toward sleep, correspond with psychological and behavioral differences reflecting such differing priorities. Orientation toward sleep can thus be understood as part of the overall lifetime strategies that people pursue.

Feelings of obligation are valuations of signaling-mediated social payoffs.

We extend Tomasello's framework by addressing the functional challenge of obligation. If the long-run social consequences of a decision are sufficiently costly, obligation motivates the actor to forgo potential immediate benefits in favor of long-term social interests. Thus, obligation psychology balances the downstream socially-mediated payoffs from a decision. This perspective can predict when and why obligation will be experienced.

Elevation, an emotion for prosocial contagion, is experienced more strongly by those with greater expectations of the cooperativeness of others.

A unique emotion, elevation, is thought to underlie prosocial contagion, a process whereby witnessing a prosocial act leads to acting prosocially. Individuals differ in their propensity to experience elevation, and thus their proneness to prosocial contagion, but little is known about the causes of such variation. We introduce an adaptationist model wherein elevation marks immediate circumstances in which generalized prosociality is advantageous, with this evaluation of circumstances hinging in part on prior expectations of others' prosociality. In 15 studies, we add to evidence that elevation can reliably be elicited and mediates prosocial contagion. Importantly, we confirm a novel prediction-generated by our adaptationist account-that an idealistic attitude, which indexes others' expected degree of prosociality, moderates the relationship between exposure to prosocial cues and experiencing elevation. We discuss how our findings inform both basic theorizing in the affective sciences and translational efforts to engineer a more harmonious world, and we offer future research directions to further test and extend our model.

Does observing reciprocity or exploitation affect elevation, a mechanism driving prosociality?

Fitness is enhanced by determining when to behave prosocially. Elevation, an uplifting emotion elicited by witnessing exemplary prosociality, upregulates prosociality in the presence of prosocial others, as such contexts render prosociality profitable and/or antisociality costly. Prior research examines responses to a single highly prosocial individual. However, the profitability of enhancing prosociality hinges not only on potential interactions with a single actor, but also on the actions of others. Accordingly, information regarding how others respond to the prosocial exemplar may influence elevation elicitation and corresponding changes in prosocial motivation. If others reciprocate the exemplar's prosociality, or pay prosociality forward, this expands opportunities for the observer to profit by increasing prosociality, and thus could enhance elevation elicitation. Conversely, if others exploit the exemplar, this may diminish the profitability of prosociality, as the observer who acts prosocially may similarly be exploited and/or the resources with which the exemplar could reciprocate will be depleted. Conducting three online studies of Americans in which information regarding the responses of others to a prosocial exemplar was manipulated, we find that, against predictions, prosocial responses by the beneficiaries of prosociality generally do not enhance elevation among observers, whereas, consonant with predictions, antisocial responses markedly diminish elevation among observers.

Electoral fortunes reverse, mindsets do not.

Conservatives and liberals have previously been shown to differ in the propensity to view socially-transmitted information about hazards as more plausible than that concerning benefits. Given differences between conservatives and liberals in threat sensitivity and dangerous-world beliefs, correlations between political orientation and negatively-biased credulity may thus reflect endogenous mindsets. Alternatively, such results may owe to the political hierarchy at the time of previous research, as the tendency to see dark forces at work is thought to be greater among those who are out of political power. Adjudicating between these accounts can inform how societies respond to the challenge of alarmist disinformation campaigns. We exploit the consequences of the 2016 U.S. elections to test these competing explanations of differences in negatively-biased credulity and conspiracism as a function of political orientation. Two studies of Americans reveal continued positive associations between conservatism, negatively-biased credulity, and conspiracism despite changes to the power structure in conservatives' favor.

State-dependent risk-taking.

Who takes risks, and when? The relative state model proposes two non-independent selection pressures governing risk-taking: need-based and ability-based. The need-based account suggests that actors take risks when they cannot reach target states with low-risk options (consistent with risk-sensitivity theory). The ability-based account suggests that actors engage in risk-taking when they possess traits or abilities that increase the expected value of risk-taking (by increasing the probability of success, enhancing payoffs for success or buffering against failure). Adaptive risk-taking involves integrating both considerations. Risk-takers compute the expected value of risk-taking based on their state-the interaction of embodied capital relative to one's situation, to the same individual in other circumstances or to other individuals. We provide mathematical support for this dual pathway model, and show that it can predict who will take the most risks and when (e.g. when risk-taking will be performed by those in good, poor, intermediate or extreme state only). Results confirm and elaborate on the initial verbal model of state-dependent risk-taking: selection favours agents who calibrate risk-taking based on implicit computations of condition and/or competitive (dis)advantage, which in turn drives patterned individual differences in risk-taking behaviour.

May God Guide Our Guns : Visualizing Supernatural Aid Heightens Team Confidence in a Paintball Battle Simulation.

The perceived support of supernatural agents has been historically, ethnographically, and theoretically linked with confidence in engaging in violent intergroup conflict. However, scant experimental investigations of such links have been reported to date, and the extant evidence derives largely from indirect laboratory methods of limited ecological validity. Here, we experimentally tested the hypothesis that perceived supernatural aid would heighten inclinations toward coalitional aggression using a realistic simulated coalitional combat paradigm: competitive team paintball. In a between-subjects design, US paintball players recruited for the study were experimentally primed with thoughts of supernatural support using a guided visualization exercise analogous to prayer, or with a control visualization of a nature scene. The participants then competed in a team paintball battle game modeled after "Capture the Flag." Immediately before and after the battle, participants completed surveys assessing confidence in their coalitional and personal battle performance. Participants assessed their coalition's prospects of victory and performance more positively after visualizing supernatural aid. Participants primed with supernatural support also reported inflated assessments of their own performance. Importantly, however, covarying increases in assessments of their overall coalition's performance accounted for the latter effect. This study provided support for the hypothesis that perceived supernatural support can heighten both prospective confidence in coalitional victory and retrospective confidence in the combat performance of one's team, while highlighting the role of competitive play in evoking the coalitional psychology of intergroup conflict. These results accord with and extend convergent prior findings derived from laboratory paradigms far removed from the experience of combat. Accordingly, the field study approach utilized here shows promise as a method for investigating coalitional battle dynamics in a realistic, experientially immersive manner.

Disgust as a mechanism for decision making under risk: Illuminating sex differences and individual risk-taking correlates of disgust propensity.

The emotion disgust motivates costly behavioral strategies that mitigate against potentially larger costs associated with pathogens, sexual behavior, and moral transgressions. Because disgust thereby regulates exposure to harm, it is by definition a mechanism for calibrating decision making under risk. Understanding this illuminates two features of the demographic distribution of this emotion. First, this approach predicts and explains sex differences in disgust. Greater female disgust propensity is often reported and discussed in the literature, but, to date, conclusions have been based on informal comparisons across a small number of studies, while existing functionalist explanations are at best incomplete. We report the results of an extensive meta-analysis documenting this sex difference, arguing that key features of this pattern are best explained as one manifestation of a broad principle of the evolutionary biology of risk-taking: for a given potential benefit, males in an effectively polygynous mating system accept the risk of harm more willingly than do females. Second, viewing disgust as a mechanism for decision making under risk likewise predicts that individual differences in disgust propensity should correlate with individual differences in various forms of risky behavior, because situational and dispositional factors that influence valuation of opportunity and hazard are often correlated across multiple decision contexts. In two large-sample online studies, we find consistent associations between disgust and risk avoidance. We conclude that disgust and related emotions can be usefully examined through the theoretical lens of decision making under risk in light of human evolution. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).