Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2018;12:e12371. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12371 w Abstract The behavioral immune system is a motivational system that helps minimize infection risk by changing cognition, affect, and behavior in ways that promote pathogen avoidance. In the current paper, we review foundational concepts of the behavioral immune system and provide a brief summary of recent social psychological research on this topic. Next, we highlight current conceptual and empirical limitations of this work and delineate important questions that have the potential to drive major advances in the field. These questions include predicting the ontological development of the behavioral immune system, specifying the relationship between this system and the physiological immune system, and distinguishing conditions that elicit direct effects of situational pathogen threats versus effects that occur only in interaction with dispositional disease concerns. This discussion highlights significant challenges and underexplored topics to be addressed by the next generation of behavioral immune system research.

The behavioral immune system: Current concerns and future directions

Research on the dispositional origins of political preferences is flourishing, and the primary conclusion drawn from this work is that stronger needs for security and certainty attract people to a broad-based politically conservative ideology. Though this literature covers much ground, most integrative assessments of it have paid insufficient attention to the presence and implications of contingencies in the relationship between dispositional attributes and political attitudes. In this article, we review research showing that relationships between needs for security and certainty and political preferences vary considerably—sometimes to the point of directional shifts—on the basis of (1) issue domain and (2) contextual factors governing the content and volume of political discourse individuals are exposed to. On the basis of this evidence, we argue that relationships between dispositional attributes and political preferences vary in the extent to which they reflect an organic functional resonance between dispositions and preferences or identity-expressive motivation to adopt a political attitude merely because it is discursively packaged with other need-congruent attitudes. We contend that such a distinction is critical to gaining a realistic understanding of the origins and nature of ideological belief systems, and we consequently recommend an increased focus on issue-based and contextual variation in relationships between dispositions and political preferences.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/pops.12477

The Contingent, Contextual Nature of the Relationship Between Needs for Security and Certainty and Political Preferences: Evidence and Implications

Predators often cause prey to adopt defensive strategies that reduce predation risk. The ‘ecology of fear’ examines these trait changes and their consequences. Similarly, parasites can cause hosts to adopt defensive strategies that reduce infection risk. However the ecological and evolutionary consequences of these behaviors (the ‘ecology of disgust’) are seldom considered. Here we identify direct and indirect effects of parasite avoidance on hosts and parasites, and examine differences between predators and parasites in terms of cost, detectability, and aggregation. We suggest that the nonconsumptive effects of parasites might overshadow their consumptive effects, as has been shown for predators. We emphasize the value of uniting predator–prey and parasite–host theory under a general consumer–resource framework.

Ecological and Evolutionary Consequences of Parasite Avoidance.

The behavioral immune system is designed to avoid infected individuals, not outgroups

Recent research finds that political candidates and leaders with dominant, masculine physical features are more preferred under conditions of conflict than of cooperation. Importantly, however, methodological limitations of past research have hindered the identification of whether this effect reflects that voters intuitively view (1) dominant leaders as more competent in solving problems of conflict, (2) nondominant leaders as more competent in solving problems of cooperation, or (3) both. In this article, we utilize recent advances in evolutionary psychology to form precise predictions on the nature of the underlying psychology and employ an unprecedented array of data types—including highly controlled experiments, natural experiments, and behavioral measures—to investigate the validity of these predictions. Using large approximately nationally representative surveys of 2,009 Poles and Ukrainians fielded during the Crimea crisis in 2014, we find that preferences for leader dominance are exclusively driven by the intuition that dominant leaders are better able to facilitate aggressive responses during social conflict and that these preferences are regulated by contextual conditions and individual predispositions related to such responses.

/pdf/perceived-conflict-and-leader-dominance-individual-and-4o8rqabfht.pdf

Perceived Conflict and Leader Dominance: Individual and Contextual Factors Behind Preferences for Dominant Leaders

People who are more avoidant of pathogens are more politically conservative, as are nations with greater parasite stress. In the current research, we test two prominent hypotheses that have been proposed as explanations for these relationships. The first, which is an intragroup account, holds that these relationships between pathogens and politics are based on motivations to adhere to local norms, which are sometimes shaped by cultural evolution to have pathogen-neutralizing properties. The second, which is an intergroup account, holds that these same relationships are based on motivations to avoid contact with outgroups, who might pose greater infectious disease threats than ingroup members. Results from a study surveying 11,501 participants across 30 nations are more consistent with the intragroup account than with the intergroup account. National parasite stress relates to traditionalism (an aspect of conservatism especially related to adherence to group norms) but not to social dominance orientation (SDO; an aspect of conservatism especially related to endorsements of intergroup barriers and negativity toward ethnic and racial outgroups). Further, individual differences in pathogen-avoidance motives (i.e., disgust sensitivity) relate more strongly to traditionalism than to SDO within the 30 nations.

/pdf/parasite-stress-and-pathogen-avoidance-relate-to-distinct-3d9xmaspux.pdf

Alan Conway

Papers

Parasite stress and pathogen avoidance relate to distinct dimensions of political ideology across 30 nations