7 found
Sort by:
  1. Pat Barclay (2013). Pathways to Abnormal Revenge and Forgiveness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 (1):17-18.
    The target article's important point is easily misunderstood to claim that all revenge is adaptive. Revenge and forgiveness can overstretch (or understretch) the bounds of utility due to misperceptions, minimization of costly errors, a breakdown within our evolved revenge systems, or natural genetic and developmental variation. Together, these factors can compound to produce highly abnormal instances of revenge and forgiveness.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Adam Sparks, Sandeep Mishra & Pat Barclay (2013). Fundamental Freedoms and the Psychology of Threat, Bargaining, and Inequality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (5):500-501.
    Van de Vliert's findings may be explained by the psychology of threat and bargaining. Poor people facing extreme threats must cope by surrendering individual freedom in service of shared group needs. Wealthier people are more able to flee from threats and/or resist authoritarianism, so their leaders must concede greater freedom. Incorporating these factors (plus inequality) can sharpen researchers' predictions.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Pat Barclay & Francesco Guala (2012). Proximate and Ultimate Causes of Punishment and Strong Reciprocity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (1):16.
    While admirable, Guala's discussion of reciprocity suffers from a confusion between proximate causes (psychological mechanisms triggering behaviour) and ultimate causes (evolved function of those psychological mechanisms). Because much work on commits this error, I clarify the difference between proximate and ultimate causes of cooperation and punishment. I also caution against hasty rejections of of experimental evidence.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Pat Barclay (2008). Enhanced Recognition of Defectors Depends on Their Rarity. Cognition 107 (3):817-828.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Pat Barclay & Martin L. Lalumière (2006). Do People Differentially Remember Cheaters? Human Nature 17 (1):98-113.
    The evolution of reciprocal altruism probably involved the evolution of mechanisms to detect cheating and remember cheaters. In a well-known study, Mealey, Daood, and Krage (1996) observed that participants had enhanced memory for faces that had previously been associated with descriptions of acts of cheating. There were, however, problems with the descriptions that were used in that study. We sought to replicate and extend the findings of Mealey and colleagues by using more controlled descriptions and by examining the possibility of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Daniel Brian Krupp, Pat Barclay, Martin Daly, Toko Kiyonari, Greg Dingle & Margo Wilson (2005). Let's Add Some Psychology (and Maybe Even Some Evolution) to the Mix. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (6):828-829.
    Henrich et al.'s nice cross-cultural experiments would benefit from models that specify the decision rules that humans use and the specific developmental pathways that allow cooperative norms to be internalized. Such models could help researchers to design further experiments to examine human social adaptations. We must also test whether the “same” experiments measure similar constructs in each culture, using additional methods and measures.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Pat Barclay & Martin Daly (2003). Humans Should Be Individualistic and Utility-Maximizing, but Not Necessarily “Rational”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):154-155.
    One reason why humans don't behave according to standard game theoretical rationality is because it's not realistic to assume that everyone else is behaving rationally. An individual is expected to have psychological mechanisms that function to maximize his/her long-term payoffs in a world of potentially “irrational” individuals. Psychological decision theory has to be individualistic because individuals make decisions, not groups.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation