No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Considering the role of ecology on individual differentiation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 October 2016
Abstract
Our commentary articulates some of the commonalities between Baumeister et al.'s theory of socially differentiated roles and Strategic Differentiation-Integration Effort. We expand upon the target article's position by arguing that differentiating social roles is contextual and driven by varying ecological pressures, producing character displacement not only among individuals within complex societies, but also across social systems and multiple levels of organization.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016
References
Alexander, R. D. (1974) The evolution of social
behavior. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics
5:325–83.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. L., Fernandes, H. B. F. & Woodley, M. A. (2014) SD-IE and other differentiation
effects in Italy and Spain. Personality and
Individual Differences
68:189–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belsky, J., Steinberg, L. & Draper, P. (1991) Childhood experience, interpersonal
development, and reproductive strategy: An evolutionary theory of
socialization. Child Development
62:647–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cabeza de Baca, T. & Figueredo, A. J. (2014) The cognitive ecology of Mexico:
Climatic and socio-cultural effects on life history strategy and general
cognitive ability. Intelligence
47:63–71. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.08.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabeza de Baca, T., Figueredo, A. J. & Ellis, B. J. (2012) An evolutionary analysis of variation
in parental effort: Determinants and assessment.
Parenting: Science and Practice
12:94–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, B. J., Figueredo, A. J., Brumbach, B. H. & Schlomer, G. L. (2009) Mechanisms of environmental risk: The
impact of harsh versus unpredictable environments on the evolution and
development of life history strategies. Human
Nature
20:204–68.Google Scholar
Fernandes, H. B. F. & Woodley, M. A. (2013) Strategic differentiation and
integration among the 50 states of the USA.
Personality and Individual Differences
55:1000–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueredo, A. J. & Jacobs, W. J. (2010) Aggression, risk-taking, and
alternative life history strategies: The behavioral ecology of social
deviance. In: Bio-psycho-social perspectives on
interpersonal violence, ed. Frias-Armenta, M. & Corral-Verdugo, V., pp.
3–28. Nova Science
Publishers.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Patch, E. A. & Gómez Ceballos, E. (2015) A life history approach to the
dynamics of social selection. In: Evolutionary
perspectives on social psychology, ed. Zeigler-Hill, V., Welling, L. & Shackelford, T. K., pp.
364–72. Springer International
Publishing.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Vásquez, G., Brumbach, B. H., Schneider, S. M. R., Sefcek, J. A., Tal, I. R., Hill, D., Wenner, C. J. & Jacobs, W. J. (2006) Consilience and life history theory:
From genes to brain to reproductive strategy.
Developmental Review
26:243–75.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Woodley, M. A., Brown, S. D. & Ross, K. C. (2013) Multiple successful test of the
strategic differentiation-integration effort (SD-IE)
hypothesis. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and
Cultural Psychology
7:361–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, H., Hill, K., Hurtado, A. M. & Lancaster, J. (2001) The embodied capital theory of human
evolution. In: Reproductive ecology and human
evolution, ed. Ellison, P.
T., pp.
293–317. Aldine de
Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kaplan, H. S. & Gangestad, S. W. (2005) Life history theory and evolutionary
psychology. In: Handbook of evolutionary
psychology, ed. Buss, D.
M., pp.
68–95.
Wiley.Google Scholar
Lancaster, J. B. & Kaplan, H. S. (2009) The endocrinology of the human
adaptive complex. In: Endocrinology of social
relationships, ed. Ellison, P. T. & Gray, P. G. , pp.
95–119. Harvard
University Press.Google Scholar
Stearns, S. C., Allal, N. & Mace, R. (2008) Life history theory and human
development. In: Foundations of evolutionary
psychology, ed. Crawford, C. & Krebs, D., pp.
47–69.
Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Woodley, M. A. (2011) The cognitive
differentiation-integration effort hypothesis: A synthesis between the
fitness indicator and life history models of human
intelligence. Review of General Psychology
15:228–45.Google Scholar
Woodley, M. A. & Fernandes, H. B. F. (2014) Strategic and cognitive
differentiation-integration effort in a study of 76
countries. Personality and Individual
Differences
57:3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodley, M. A., Fernandes, H. B. F. & Madison, G. (2014) Strategic differentiation-integration
effort amongst the 47 prefectures of Japan.
Personality and Individual Differences
63:64–68.Google Scholar
Woodley, M. A., Figueredo, A. J., Brown, S. D. & Ross, K. C. (2013) Four successful tests of the
cognitive differentiation-integration effort hypothesis.
Intelligence
41:832–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
Are groups more or less than the sum of their members? The moderating role of individual identification
Related commentaries (29)
Beyond old dichotomies: Individual differentiation can occur through group commitment, not despite it
But is it social? How to tell when groups are more than the sum of their members
Considering the role of ecology on individual differentiation
Differentiated selves can surely be good for the group, but let's get clear about why
Differentiated selves help only when identification is strong and tasks are complex
Differentiation of selves: Differentiating a fuzzy concept
Disputing deindividuation: Why negative group behaviours derive from group norms, not group immersion
Group and individual as complementary conceptual categories
Group behavior in the military may provide a unique case
Group effort in resuscitation teams
Group members differ in relative prototypicality: Effects on the individual and the group
Group membership: Who gets to decide?
Groups need selves, but which selves? Dual selves in groups and the downsides of individuation
How group members contribute to group performance: Evidence from agent-based simulations
Humans are not the Borg: Personal and social selves function as components in a unified self-system
Identity matters to individuals: Group assessment cannot be reduced to collective performance
Member differentiation and group tasks: More than meets the eye
Not even wrong: Imprecision perpetuates the illusion of understanding at the cost of actual understanding
Reputational concerns as a general determinant of group functioning
Roles and ranks: The importance of hierarchy for group functioning
Social identification is generally a prerequisite for group success and does not preclude intragroup differentiation
Social, not individual, identification is the key to understanding group phenomena
Solved paradoxes and old hats? The research needed on differentiated selves
Task specificity and the impact on both the individual and group during the formation of groups
The hows and whys of “we” (and “I”) in groups
The subtle effects of incentives and competition on group performance
The unique role of the agent within the romantic group
Vicarious contagion decreases differentiation – and comes with costs
We agree and we disagree, which is exactly what most people do most of the time
Author response
Differentiating selves facilitates group outcomes