Abstract

The central assumption of behavioral ecology is that natural selection has shaped individuals with the capacity to make decisions that balance the fitness costs and benefits of behavior. A number of factors shape the fitness costs and benefits of maternal care, but we lack a clear understanding how they, taken together, play a role in the decision-making process. In animal studies, the use of experimental methods has allowed for the tight control of these factors. Standard experimentation is inappropriate in human behavioral ecology, but vignette experiments may solve the problem. I used a confounded factorial vignette experiment to gather 640 third-party judgments about the maternal care decisions of hypothetical women and their children from 40 female karo Batak respondents in rural Indonesia. This allowed me to test hypotheses derived from parental investment theory about the relative importance of five binary factors in shaping maternal care decisions with regard to two distinct scenarios. As predicted, access to resources—measured as the ability of a woman to provide food for her children—led to increased care. A handful of other factors conformed to prediction, but they were inconsistent across scenarios. The results suggest that mothers may use simple heuristics, rather than a full accounting for costs and benefits, to make decisions about maternal care. Vignettes have become a standard tool for studying decision making, but have made only modest inroads to evolutionarily informed studies of human behavior.

Highlights

  • Evolutionary studies of maternal decision making in humans have met with a mixed bag of successes and setbacks

  • Human behavioral ecologists have tested a wide range of hypotheses derived from parental investment theory, many of these studies find a lack of support for the predictions of optimality models [2]

  • Human adaptations are shaped by the evolution of genes and culture [6], it is still a reasonable hypothesis that their decision rules should oftentimes lead to outcomes that maximize fitness

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Evolutionary studies of maternal decision making in humans have met with a mixed bag of successes and setbacks. Its central concern is how natural selection shapes decision rules—i.e., the ability to adjust behavior facultatively in response to environmental conditions in a way that maximizes inclusive fitness. It might be assumed that conscious choice is necessary because the study of decision rules is steeped in economic jargon. This need not be the case, as natural selection can create decision-making abilities that employ sensory, endocrine, neural, and cognitive mechanisms [5]. Behavioral ecologists study decision rules by testing hypotheses derived from optimality models with data on actual or reported behavior [1]. The study of human decision making has been severely hamstrung by the use of correlational methods over experimental ones, as the tight controls offered by experiments have been crucial in studying the decision rules of other organisms [8,9,10]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call