Assignment 2: Evolution, Genes, Environment, and Development (12%)
Assignment 2 is worth 12% of your final course mark, and it is graded with a total of 80 marks (20 marks for each of the four parts).
You will submit all four parts of the assignment (parts A, B, C, and D) together as one file at the end of Unit 2. Label each part of the assignment so it can be easily identified.
Part A: Evolutionary Psychology of Morality
In this part of Assignment 2 you will learn more about evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary psychologists strive to understand what psychological adaptations evolved, why they evolved (i.e., what reproductive or survival “problems” did they solve?), and how they operate in the contemporary world, which may differ quite drastically from the ancestral ecological conditions in which the adaptation was naturally selected.
Adaptations are any structure, mechanism, design feature, or trait under genetic control that conferred reproductive and survival success on our ancestors. The human eye, for example, was designed by natural selection—every successive approximation of the eye that conferred a survival and reproduction advantage contributed its possessors’ genetic success in subsequent generations. Over time, the design of the human eye reached a limit in conferring additional reproductive success, with the consequence that the design is now universal and all humans share it. No individual differences exist in design, although clearly there are differences in shape, eye colour, visual ability, and so on.
Evolutionary psychologists are interested in psychological mechanisms such as emotions.
Instructions
Watch the following TED Talk video:
de Waal, F. (2011, November). Moral behavior in animals [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals.
In this video clip, you will see Frans de Waal discuss morality from an evolutionary approach. de Waal argues that morality is dependent on reciprocity and empathy. These are fundamental topics in psychology that relate to our understanding of human social interactions. de Waals’ talk gives us a basis for understanding how morality in the general sense (i.e., not with respect to a specific religion) solved adaptive problems related to existing and cooperating with others.
Once you have finished watching the video and have read Chapter 3 in the Wade et al. textbook, answer the following questions:
- What is the relevance of the non-humananimal examples of cooperation that de Waal describes to our understanding of the evolution of human morality?
- What is the evolutionary benefit to having empathy? Why did empathy evolve? Describe some situations in the ancestral world where having empathy would increase your survival or reproductive success?
- The human potential for empathy seems to be universal. While not everyone is highly empathic, possessing a degree of empathy can be said to be “species-typical”. What would the consequences be for someone with a total lack of empathy? What about for friends, family, and co-workers of that person?
- If you had to describe the features of morality without referring to any specific religious or legal requirements or prescriptions, what would your description contain? In other words, if a sense of morality is universal, what are the basic “rules” that would apply regardless of your religion, ethnicity, etc.?
Rubric (20 marks)
The activity will be marked out of 20 marks, with 5 marks per question, according to the following:
|
Exceeds Expectations |
Meets Expectations |
Nearly Meets Expectations |
Below Expectations |
| Description, examples, analysis
Mark out of 4 |
Thorough explanation and detailed, relevant examples
4 |
Thorough explanation and relevant examples with a few details missing
3 |
Explanation and examples have several missing details
2.5 |
Explanation and examples have many missing details
1.9 |
| Writing
Mark out of 1 |
Error free
1 |
A few spelling or grammatical errors
.8 |
Several spelling or grammatical errors
.6 |
Many spelling or grammatical errors
.5 |
Part B: Evolution and Sex Differences related to Mates
In Part B of Assignment 2, you are going to practice thinking like an evolutionary psychologist. First, read Chapter 3 in the Wade et al. textbook. Then, put on your thinking cap, and respond to the following:.
You are interested in formulating some predictions related to human courtship, specifically about heterosexual men and women. You are interested in looking for evidence of any sex differences in psychological mechanisms (i.e. mental modules, patterns of emotion, thinking, and reasoning) that relate to finding a mate that evolved during our evolutionary history.
You are not so interested in behaviour (because people have to act in the context of their own ecological and cultural conditions, sometimes in spite of how they think, or what they want). As an evolutionary psychologist, you are interested in psychological qualities that are universal, not specific to individual racial or cultural groups. You are going to use your understanding of human ancestral history to make your predictions. This is what you know (or are assuming based on reasonable evidence or logic) has been true for 99% of human evolutionary history:
- Reproduction is far “costlier” for women than men: women have limited numbers of eggs; are fertile after menarche up to the approach of menopause, rather than into old age as men are; pregnancy, labour, and delivery are difficult, dangerous, and require enormous physiological resources.
- Infant and mother mortality was high due to lack of interventions for breech births, prolonged labour, large babies, puerpal fever, etc.
- Breastfeeding was the primary source of nutrition for children and early weaning was unlikely. There was no baby bottle.
- Breastfeeding on demand has a contraceptive effect. There was no reliable alternative contraception. Coupled with early infant mortality, population growth was very slow. Families with surviving children were small. Men could have more children than women.
- Humans were hunter-gatherers – it’s difficult to track and catch game while breastfeeding. It was essential to follow the food supply, and food was sought daily.
- There was little protection against disease or effective treatment for serious injuries.
Now, based on the above, make a list of at least 3 predictions (excluding the example below) about ways of thinking or feeling about courtship and mating that you think should have evolved during our ancestral evolutionary history related to courtship and mating: who makes a good mate; when and with whom should you decide to have sex; what qualities should you value in a mate; are short term relationships different than long term ones; how long should you know someone before partnering; and so on. Note that these considerations could be applied to arranged marriages as well, in terms of the thinking behind who would make a suitable mate for one’s son or daughter, etc.
For each prediction show your logic as it relates to the above assumptions, i.e., “Because there was no reliable contraception, I predict . . . because . . .”
Example
- Because contraception is unreliable, I predict that women evolved to be choosier about when to have sex than men because they might get pregnant and each pregnancy is “costly”. In this example, “choosiness’ is both a feeling and a way of thinking; it could be a feeling of unease, or of not feeling ready, or hesitance, etc.
Note that we are not saying that women ARE choosier nowadays – that is a separate prediction that could be tested in research. We are rather trying to predict what would have evolved, based on the logic that human adaptations have mostly been shaped during the 99% of evolutionary history when we were hunter-gatherers. Understanding how those adaptations operate in contemporary environments is a whole other question!
Also note that sexuality is not always heterosexual. Whom we are attracted to and have sex with are interesting issues from a psychological point of view. A significant proportion of the population identifies as non-exclusively heterosexual and always has; we have not evolved as an exclusively heterosexual species. But in the example above, we are looking at the impact over evolutionary time of pregnancy and childcare on decisions about heterosexual partnerships.
Rubric (20 marks)
The activity will be marked out of 20 marks, according to the following:
| Exceeds Expectations
17-20 marks |
Meets Expectations
13-16 marks |
Almost Meets Expectations
11-12 marks |
Does not yet Meet Expectations
10 or fewer |
| Clear, complete, accurate description and analysis.
Accurate spelling and grammar. |
Clear, complete, accurate description/analysis except for a couple of missing details.
Mostly accurate spelling and grammar |
Description/analysis is missing several details, and/or several inaccuracies in spelling or grammar. |
Description/analysis is missing many details, and/or many inaccuracies in spelling or grammar. |
Part C: Evaluating Children’s Toys
For this part of the assignment, you are going to get the chance to play with some toys! And if not play, at least look at, describe, and evaluate. The task for this part of the assignment is to find a toy, and then describe and evaluate it according to a set of criteria that relate to children’s development, as discussed in Chapter 13 of the Wade et al. textbook.
You are not expected to purchase anything for this part of the assignment. However, you should view an actual toy. There are several ways you might do this: You may have child yourself or have a friend or family member with a child who will allow you to look at their toys; thrift stores are common sources of very inexpensive toys that may be purchased for a dollar or two; you can see what is available in the toy aisle of a department or toy store, etc. You may even have one of your childhood toys still in your possession. It would be best if you can actually handle the toy, rather than simply look at it. Note that the toy used in this part of the assignment cannot be a stuffie (e.g., teddy bear or similar).
Provide a full description of your chosen toy (worth 3 marks) and attach a photograph (worth 1 mark) with your description. Then respond to the following evaluation criteria in full sentences in your own words, with sources cited and referenced (each question is worth 2 marks):
- What is the age range of children for whom the toy was created, and how do you know? How much pleasure or interest do you think the child will have in playing with this toy? Explain your answer.
- Describe the cognitive abilities and limitations of children at this age according to Piaget.
- Describe typical gender development and milestones of children at this age.
- Evaluate the appropriateness of the toy for children of this age, including a rationale based on your knowledge of child development. Include points of view of both psychologist and parent. Include both the benefits and drawbacks of the toy for children at this age.
- Suggest how parents and children may use the toy together and how a child may use the toy alone.
- Describe the appeal and appropriateness of the toy to boys and girls. Should the toy maker have done something differently to appeal to both boys and girls? Will parents use the toy differently for boys and girls?
- Evaluate the effectiveness of the toy as a learning aid, comfort object, or social model.
- Suggest how to make the toy better. These should include design, availability, cost, size, colour, etc.
Rubric (20 marks)
The activity will be marked out of 20 marks, according to the following:
| Exceeds Expectations
17-20 marks |
Meets Expectations
13-16 marks |
Almost Meets Expectations
11-12 marks |
Does not yet Meet Expectations
10 or fewer |
| Clear, complete, accurate description and analysis.
Accurate spelling and grammar. |
Clear, complete, accurate description/analysis except for a couple of missing details.
Mostly accurate spelling and grammar |
Description/analysis is missing several details, and/or several inaccuracies in spelling or grammar. |
Description/analysis is missing many details, and/or many inaccuracies in spelling or grammar. |
Part D: Generational Influences on Development
For this part of the assignment, you are going to consider how changes in key life events between 100 years ago and now might have or have not influenced adult development. First, read the Globe and Mail article, “Time machine: What life in Canada was like before the First World War.”
Note:
You might have to create a free account before you are able to read the article online
Also consider the following statistics:
|
Now |
100 Years Ago |
| Average age at menarche |
12 ½ |
16 ½ |
| Average household size |
Less than 3 people |
10 people |
| Average # children per woman |
1.5 |
7 |
| Average age at 1st marriage |
Women 30, Men 32 |
Women 22, Men 26 |
| Reliability of contraception |
Used properly, nearly 100% |
Very low; not easily available |
| Divorce rate |
40% |
Exremely low |
| Life expectancy |
82 |
56 |
| Formal education |
22% have college degree |
More children were not in school than in school |
| Payment for health costs |
Universal – minimal cost |
Individuals paid all |
Of course, these statistics are not representative of all Canadians. Some Canadians, such as Aboriginal people, people who identify as LGBTQ+, people of colour or from ethnic minority communities, and so on, may have different life expectancies, or fertility rates, or marriage and divorce rates, etc. If you would like to, please do some research on any group or population that is of interest to you, and compare life circumstances between now and 100 years ago (please cite your sources). You may focus on any group that interests you for the next part of the assignment, or you may refer to the Globe and Mail article and statistics above.
After reading above, answer the following questions (remember: you may focus on a specific group of interest as described above):
- Compare, contrast, and summarize what is/was considered “on-time” for adult development during these two periods. For example, how does/did timing of events that are typical for each generation affect adult development? What effects are/were cohort-specific? Use examples from the readings above or your own research in your comparison.
- Speculate about the social and economic effects of “off-time” events on adult development. For example, while women have always had babies into their forties, having a first baby at age 45 could be considered “off-time” both now and then, but the effects on adult development might be different in these different time periods. What effects are cohort-specific and why? Use examples from the readings above or your own research in your comparison.
- Describe how events in your own life to date have followed a typical or non-typical trajectory, and relate to the readings.
- Finally, discuss the meaning of aging both now and historically with respect to the discussion of Erikson’s stages in Chapter 13 of the Wade et al. textbook.
Rubric (20 marks)
The activity will be marked out of 20 marks, with 5 marks per question, according to the following:
|
Exceeds Expectations |
Meets Expectations |
Nearly Meets Expectations |
Below Expectations |
| Description, examples, analysis
Mark out of 4 |
Thorough explanation and detailed, relevant examples
4 |
Thorough explanation and relevant examples with a few details missing
3 |
Explanation and examples have several missing details
2.5 |
Explanation and examples have many missing details
1.9 |
| Writing
Mark out of 1 |
Error free
1 |
A few spelling or grammatical errors
.8 |
Several spelling or grammatical errors
.6 |
Many spelling or grammatical errors
.5 |
Solution
De Waal, in his work, provides many instances of non-human socialization, such as the test he did on the chimpanzees and elephants on cooperation. Animal behavior would be expected to ignore another’s needs as long as they have what they want. This expectation is the opposite as animals recognize the need to help others, a term known as reciprocity. Reciprocity is one of the building blocks of morality, with the other being empathy. The examples of non human cooperation show that with human beings having an evolutionary connection to chimpanzees, the morals are passed on throughout evolution. The observation that morality in human beings, when compared to animals, is much higher only proves that humans have modified and transformed the aspects of morality shared by animals into a more sophisticated characteristic (Boomgaard, 2008, p. 695 )………………….Purchase the link to access full answer @$8.99