66 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR

Genetics, Evolutionary
6
Psychology, and Behavior
A Thousand Words Photography by Erica Corner

Behavior Genetics: Predicting

Individual Differences
2-13
6-1 What are chromosomes, DNA, genes, and the human genome? How do
behavior geneticists explain our individual differences?
Our shared brain architecture predisposes some common behavioral tendencies.
The nurture of nature Parents every- Whether we live in the Arctic or the tropics, we sense the world, develop language,
where wonder: Will my baby grow up and feel hunger through identical mechanisms. We prefer sweet tastes to sour.
to be peaceful or aggressive? Homely We divide the color spectrum into similar colors. And we feel drawn to behaviors
or attractive? Successful or struggling that produce and protect offspring.
at every step? What comes built in, and Our human family shares not only a common biological heritage—cut us and
what is nurtured—and how? Research we bleed—but also common social behaviors. Whether named Gonzales, Nkomo,
reveals that nature and nurture together Smith, or Wong, we start fearing strangers at about eight months, and as adults
shape our development—every step of we prefer the company of those with attitudes and attributes similar to our own.
the way. As members of one species, we affiliate, conform, return favors, punish offenses,
organize hierarchies of status, and grieve a child’s death. A visitor from outer
space could drop in anywhere and find humans dancing and feasting, singing
and worshiping, playing sports and games, laughing and crying, living in families
and forming groups. We are the leaves of one tree.
FIGURE 6.1
2.29 But in important ways, we also are each unique. We look different. We sound
The life code The nucleus of every different. We have varying personalities, interests, and cultural and family back-
human cell contains chromosomes, each grounds. What causes our striking diversity? How much of it is shaped by our
of which is made up of two strands of differing genes, and how much by our environment—by every external influ-
DNA connected in a double helix. Genes ence, from maternal nutrition while in the womb to social support while nearing
are DNA segments that, when expressed the tomb? How does our heredity interact with our experiences to create both
(turned on), direct the development our universal human nature and our individual and social
of proteins that influence a person’s diversity? Such questions intrigue behavior geneticists.
individual development.
Chromosome Genes: Our Codes for Life
Barely more than a century ago, few would have guessed that
every cell nucleus in your body contains the genetic master
code for your entire body. It’s as if every room in Dubai’s Burj
Khalifa (the world’s tallest building) contained a book detailing
Cell the architect’s plans for the entire structure. The plans for your
Gene
own book of life run to 46 chapters—23 donated by your moth-
er’s egg and 23 by your father’s sperm. Each of these 46 chap-
ters, called a chromosome, is composed of a coiled chain of the
molecule DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). Genes, small segments
of the giant DNA molecules, form the words of those chapters
(FIGURE 2.296.1).).Altogether,
Altogether, you
you have
have 20,000
20,000 to
to 25,000 genes,
which can be either active (expressed) or inactive. Environmen-
tal events “turn on” genes, rather like hot water enabling a tea
bag to express its flavor. When turned on, genes provide the
code for creating protein molecules, our body’s building blocks.
Genetically speaking, every other human is nearly your
Nucleus identical twin. Human genome researchers have discov-
ered the common sequence within human DNA. This shared
genetic profile makes us humans, rather than tulips, bananas,
DNA or chimpanzees.
 The New Yorker Collection, 1999 Danny Shanahan
from cartoonbank.com. All rights reserved.
The occasional variations found at particular gene sites in human DNA fasci-
nate geneticists and psychologists. Slight person-to-person variations from the
common pattern give clues to our uniqueness—why one person has a disease that
another does not, why one person is tall and another short, why one is anxious
and another calm.
Most of our traits have complex genetic roots. How tall you are, for example,
reflects the size of your face, vertebrae, leg bones, and so forth—each of which
may be influenced by different genes interacting with your specific environment. “Thanks for almost everything, Dad.”
Traits such as intelligence, happiness, and aggressiveness are similarly influenced
by groups of genes. Thus, our genes help explain both our shared human nature
and our human diversity. But knowing our heredity tells only part of our story.
“We share half our genes with the banana.”
To form us, environmental influences interact with our genetic predispositions.
Evolutionary biologist Robert May,
RETRIEVE IT president of Britain’s Royal Society, 2001
• Put the following cell structures in order from smallest to largest: nucleus, gene,
chromosome
ANSWER: gene, chromosome, nucleus
“Your DNA and mine are 99.9 percent the
• When the mother’s egg and the father’s sperm unite, each contributes 23 . same. . . . At the DNA level, we are clearly
ANSWER: chromosomes all part of one big worldwide family.”
Francis Collins,
Human Genome Project director, 2007
Twin and Adoption Studies
2-14
6-2 How do twin and adoption studies help us understand the effects and
interactions of nature and nurture?
To scientifically tease apart the influences of environment and heredity, behav- See LaunchPad’s Video:
ior geneticists could wish for two types of experiments. The first would control Twin Studies for a helpful tutorial
heredity while varying the home environment. The second would control the animation.
home environment while varying heredity. Although such experiments with
human infants would be unethical, nature has done this work for us.
IDENTICAL VERSUS FRATERNAL TWINS Identical (monozygotic) twins environment every nongenetic influ-
develop from a single fertilized egg that splits in two. Thus they are genetically ence, from prenatal nutrition to the
identical—nature’s own human
human clones
clones ((FIGURE 6.2).). Indeed,
FIGURE 2.30 Indeed, they
they are clones people and things around us.
who share not only the same genes but the same conception and uterus, and usu- heredity the genetic transfer of charac-
ally the same birth date and cultural history. teristics from parents to offspring.
behavior genetics the study of the
Identical Fraternal relative power and limits of genetic and
twins twins environmental influences on behavior.
chromosomes threadlike structures
made of DNA molecules that contain the
genes.
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) a
complex molecule containing the
genetic information that makes up the
chromosomes.
genes the biochemical units of heredity
that make up the chromosomes; segments
of DNA capable of synthesizing proteins.
genome the complete instructions for
making an organism, consisting of all
the genetic material in that organism’s
chromosomes.
FIGURE 6.2
2.30
identical (monozygotic) twins
Same fertilized egg, same genes; develop from a single fertilized egg that
different eggs, different genes Identical splits in two, creating two genetically
Same Same or twins develop from a single fertilized egg, identical organisms.
sex only opposite sex fraternal twins from two.
 68 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR

Fraternal (dizygotic) twins develop from two separate

fertilized eggs. As womb-mates, they share a prenatal
environment, but they are genetically no more similar
than ordinary brothers and sisters.
Shared genes can translate into shared experiences. A
person whose identical twin has autism spectrum disor-
der, for example, has about a 3 in 4 risk of being similarly
diagnosed. If the affected twin is fraternal, the co-twin
has about a 1 in 3 risk (Ronald & Hoekstra, 2011). To
study the effects of genes and environments, hundreds
twinstrangers.com

of researchers have studied some 800,000 identical and

fraternal twin pairs (Johnson et al., 2009).
Are genetically identical twins also behaviorally more
similar than fraternal twins? Studies of thousands of
Skin deep Do identical twins have simi-
twin pairs have found that identical twins are much more alike in extraversion
lar personalities because people respond
(outgoingness) and neuroticism (emotional instability) than are fraternal twins
to their similar looks? These women look
(Kandler et al., 2011; Laceulle et al., 2011; Loehlin, 2012).
like identical twins, but they aren’t geneti-
Identical twins, more than fraternal twins, look alike. So, do people’s responses
cally related. Such “twins” do not report
to their looks account for their similarities? No. In one clever study, a researcher
similar personalities (Segal, 2013).
compared personality similarity between identical twins and unrelated look-alike
pairs (Segal, 2013). Only the identical twins reported similar personalities. Other
studies have shown that identical twins whose parents treated them alike (for
example, dressing them identically) were not psychologically more alike than
identical twins who were treated less similarly (Kendler et al., 1994; Loehlin &
Nichols, 1976). In explaining individual differences, genes matter.
SEPARATED TWINS Imagine the following science fiction experiment: A mad
scientist decides to separate identical twins at birth, then raise them in differing
environments. Better yet, consider a true story:
On a chilly February morning in 1979, some time after divorcing his first wife,
Linda, Jim Lewis awoke in his modest home next to his second wife, Betty. Deter-
mined to make this marriage work, Jim made a habit of leaving love notes to
Betty around the house. As he lay in bed he thought about others he had loved,
Twins Lorraine and Levinia Christmas, including his son, James Alan, and his faithful dog, Toy.
driving to deliver Christmas presents to Jim looked forward to spending part of the day in his basement woodwork-
each other near Flitcham, England, collided ing shop, where he enjoyed building furniture, picture frames, and other items,
(Shepherd, 1997).
including a white bench now circling a tree in his front yard. Jim also liked to
spend free time driving his Chevy, watching stock car racing, and drinking Miller
Lite beer.
Jim was basically healthy, except for occasional half-day migraine headaches
and blood pressure that was a little high, perhaps related to his chain-smoking
habit. He had become overweight a while back but had shed some of the pounds.
Having undergone a vasectomy, he was done having children.
What was extraordinary about Jim Lewis, however, was that at that same
moment (we are not making this up) there existed another man—also named
Jim—for whom all these things (right down to the dog’s name) were also true.1
This other Jim—Jim Springer—just happened, 38 years earlier, to have been his
fetal partner. Thirty-seven days after their birth, these genetically identical twins
were separated, adopted by blue-collar families, and raised with no contact or
knowledge of each other’s whereabouts until the day Jim Lewis received a call
from his genetic clone (who, having been told he had a twin, set out to find him).
fraternal (dizygotic) twins develop
One month later, the brothers became the first of many separated twin
from separate fertilized eggs. They are
genetically no closer than ordinary
pairs tested by University of Minnesota psychologist Thomas Bouchard and his
brothers and sisters, but they share a
prenatal environment. 1. Actually, this description of the two Jims errs in one respect: Jim Lewis named his son James Alan.
Jim Springer named his James Allan.
 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR 69

colleagues (Miller, 2012). The brothers’ voice intonations and inflections were In 2009, thieves broke into a Berlin store
so similar that, hearing a playback of an earlier interview, Jim Springer guessed and stole jewelry worth $6.8 million. One
“That’s me.” Wrong—it was Jim Lewis. Given tests measuring their personal- thief left a drop of sweat—a link to his
ity, intelligence, heart rate, and brain waves, the Jim twins—despite 38 years of genetic signature. Police analyzed the
separation—were virtually as alike as the same person tested twice. Both married DNA and encountered two matches: The
DNA belonged to identical twin brothers.
women named Dorothy Jane Scheckelburger. Okay, the last item is a joke. But as
The court ruled that “at least one of the
Judith Rich Harris (2006) has noted, it would hardly be weirder than some other brothers took part in the crime, but it has
reported similarities. not been possible to determine which one.”
Aided by media publicity, Bouchard (2009) and his colleagues located and Birds of a feather can rob together.
studied 74 pairs of identical twins raised apart. They continued to find similari-
ties not only of tastes and physical attributes but also of personality (character-
istic patterns of thinking, feeling, and acting), abilities, attitudes, interests, and
even fears.
In Sweden, researchers identified 99 separated identical twin pairs and more
than 200 separated fraternal twin pairs (Pedersen et al., 1988). Compared with Coincidences are not unique to twins.
equivalent samples of identical twins raised together, the separated identical Patricia Kern of Colorado was born March
twins had somewhat less identical personalities. Still, separated twins were more 13, 1941, and named Patricia Ann Campbell.
alike if genetically identical than if fraternal. And separation shortly after birth Patricia DiBiasi of Oregon also was born
(rather than, say, at age 8) did not amplify their personality differences. March 13, 1941, and named Patricia Ann
Stories of startling twin similarities have not impressed critics, who remind Campbell. Both had fathers named Robert,
us that “The plural of anecdote is not data.” They note that if any two strang- worked as bookkeepers, and at the time of
ers were to spend hours comparing their behaviors and life histories, they would this comparison had children ages 21 and
probably discover many coincidental similarities. If researchers created a control 19. Both studied cosmetology, enjoyed oil
painting as a hobby, and married military
group of biologically unrelated pairs of the same age, sex, and ethnicity, who had
men, within 11 days of each other. They
not grown up together but who were as similar to one another in economic and
are not genetically related. (From an AP
cultural background as are many of the separated twin pairs, wouldn’t these pairs report, May 2, 1983.)
also exhibit striking similarities (Joseph, 2001)? Twin researchers have replied
that separated fraternal twins do not exhibit similarities comparable with those
of separated identical twins.
The impressive data from personality assessments are
clouded by the reunion of many of the separated twins
some years before they were tested. And adoption agencies
also tend to place separated twins in similar homes. Despite
these criticisms, the striking twin-study results helped shift
scientific thinking toward a greater appreciation of genetic
influences.

Mona Friis Bertheussen/Moment Film

If genetic influences help explain individual differences,
can the same be said of trait differences between groups? Not
necessarily. Individual differences in height and weight, for
example, are highly heritable; yet nutrition (an environmental
factor) rather than genetic influences explains why, as a group,
today’s adults are taller and heavier than those of a century
ago. The two groups differ, but not because human genes have
changed in a mere century’s eyeblink of time. Ditto aggressiveness, a genetically
Identical twins are people two
Identical twin sisters Mia (left) and
influenced trait. Today’s peaceful Scandinavians differ from their more aggres-
Alexandra (right), featured in the film Twin
sive Viking ancestors, despite carrying many of the same genes.
Sisters (2013), are nearly always worlds
BIOLOGICAL VERSUS ADOPTIVE RELATIVES For behavior geneticists, apart. Adopted to different families as
nature’s second real-life experiment—adoption—creates two groups: genetic rela- infants, Mia lives in suburban California and
tives (biological parents and siblings) and environmental relatives (adoptive par- Alexandra lives in a Norwegian village. Mia
ents and siblings). For personality or any other given trait, we can therefore ask plays the piano and enjoys golf, whereas
whether adopted children are more like their biological parents, who contributed Alexandra roams the countryside and plays
their genes, or their adoptive parents, who contribute a home environment. While with her pet mouse. Despite these differ-
sharing that home environment, do adopted siblings also come to share traits? ences, they share striking similarities. Both
The stunning finding from studies of hundreds of adoptive families is that, girls dislike tomatoes, olives, and messy
with the exception of identical twins, people who grow up together do not much rooms but are wild about chocolate.
 70 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR

resemble one another in personality (McGue &

Bouchard, 1998; Plomin, 2011; Rowe, 1990). In
personality traits such as extraversion and agree-
ableness, people who have been adopted are more
similar to their biological parents than to their
caregiving adoptive parents.
The finding is important enough to bear repeat-
ing: The environment shared by a family’s children
has virtually no discernible impact on their person-
alities. Two adopted children raised in the same
home are no more likely to share personality
traits with each other than with the child down
Charles Sykes/AP Photo

the block. Heredity shapes other primates’ person-

alities, too. Macaque monkeys raised by foster
mothers exhibited social behaviors that resem-
bled their biological, rather than foster, mothers
(Maestripieri, 2003). Add in the similarity of iden-
Nature or nurture or both? When tical twins, whether they grow up together or apart, and the effect of a shared
talent runs in families, as with Wynton
environment seems shockingly modest.
Marsalis, Branford Marsalis, and Delfeayo
The genetic leash may limit the family environment’s influence on personality,
Marsalis, how do heredity and environ-
but it does not mean that adoptive parenting is a fruitless venture. As a new adop-
ment together do their work?
tive parent, I [ND] especially find it heartening to know that parents do influ-
ence their children’s attitudes, values, manners, politics, and faith (Reifman &
Cleveland, 2007). Religious involvement is genetically influenced (Steger et al.,
2011). But a pair of adopted children or identical twins will, especially during
adolescence, have more similar religious beliefs if raised together (Koenig et al.,
Edward Koren/The New Yorker Collection/Condé Nast

2005). Parenting matters!

Moreover, child neglect and abuse and even parental divorce are rare in adop-
tive homes. (Adoptive parents are carefully screened; biological parents are not.)
So it is not surprising that studies have shown that, despite a slightly greater risk
of psychological disorder, most adopted children thrive, especially when adopted
as infants (Loehlin et al., 2007; van IJzendoorn & Juffer, 2006; Wierzbicki, 1993).
Seven in eight adopted children have reported feeling strongly attached to one or
both adoptive parents. As children of self-giving parents, they have grown up to
be more self-giving and altruistic than average (Sharma et al., 1998). Many scored
“Do you, Ashley, take Nesbitt and his higher than their biological parents and raised-apart biological siblings on intel-
genome to be your husband?” ligence tests, and most grew into happier and more stable adults (Kendler et al.,
Frederick Breedon IV/Getty Images

Ryan Anson/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Adoption matters As country music

singer Faith Hill and late Apple founder
Steve Jobs experienced, children benefit
from one of the biggest gifts of love:
adoption.
 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR 71

2015; van IJzendoorn et al., 2005). In one Swedish study, children adopted as infants
interaction the interplay that occurs
grew up with fewer problems than were experienced by children whose biological
when the effect of one factor (such as
mothers initially registered them for adoption but then decided to raise the children
environment) depends on another factor
themselves (Bohman & Sigvardsson, 1990). Regardless of personality differences (such as heredity).
between adoptive family members, most adopted children benefit from adoption.

RETRIEVE IT

• How do researchers use twin and adoption studies to learn about psychological principles?
behaviors of twins raised together or separately.
also compare adopted children with their adoptive and biological parents. Some studies compare traits and
behaviors of identical twins (same genes) and fraternal twins (different genes, as in any two siblings). They
is due to genetic makeup and how much to environmental factors. Some studies compare the traits and
ANSWER: Researchers use twin and adoption studies to understand how much variation among individuals

Gene-Environment Interaction
2-15
6-3 How do heredity and environment work together?
Among our similarities, the most important—the behavioral hallmark of our
species—is our enormous adaptive capacity. Some human traits, such as having
two eyes, develop the same in virtually every environment. But other traits are
expressed only in particular environments. Go barefoot for a summer and you
will develop toughened, callused feet—a biological adaptation to friction. Mean-
while, your shod neighbor will remain a tenderfoot. The difference between the
two of you is an effect of environment. But it is also the product of a biological
mechanism—adaptation. “Men’s natures are alike; it is their habits
Genes and environment—nature and nurture—work together, like two hands that carry them far apart.”
clapping. Genes are self-regulating. Rather than acting as blueprints that lead to Confucius, Analects, 500 B.C.E.
the same result no matter the context, genes react. An African butterfly that is
green in summer turns brown in fall, thanks to a temperature-controlled genetic
switch. The same genes that produced green in one situation produce brown in
another.
To say that genes and experience are both important is true. But more precisely,
they interact. Imagine two babies, one genetically predisposed to be attractive,
sociable, and easygoing, the other less so. Assume further that the first baby
attracts more affectionate and stimulating care and so develops into a warmer
and more outgoing person. As the two children grow older, the more naturally
outgoing child may seek more activities and friends that encourage further social
confidence.

Genetic space exploration In

2015, Scott (left) and Mark (right)
Kelly embarked on a twin study that
is literally out of this world. Scott will
spend a year orbiting the planet in the
Robert Markowitz/N.A.S.A/SIPA/Newscom

International Space Station. His identi-

cal twin, Mark, will stay on Earth. Both
twins will undergo the same physical and
psychological testing. The study results
will help scientists understand how genes
and environment—in outer space and on
Earth—interact.
72 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR

What has caused their resulting personality differences? Neither heredity nor
epigenetics the study of environmental
experience act alone. Environments trigger gene activity. And our genetically
influences on gene expression that occur
influenced traits evoke significant responses in others. Thus, a child’s impul-
without a DNA change.
sivity and aggression may evoke an angry response from a parent or teacher,
evolutionary psychology the study of who reacts warmly to well-behaved children in the family or classroom. In such
the evolution of behavior and the mind,
cases, the child’s nature and the adult’s nurture interact. Gene and scene dance
using principles of natural selection.
together.
natural selection the principle that Identical twins not only share the same genetic predispositions, they also seek
those chance inherited traits that better and create similar experiences that express their shared genes (Kandler et al.,
enable an organism to survive and repro-
2012). Evocative interactions may help explain why identical twins raised in
duce in a particular environment will
different families have recalled their parents’ warmth as remarkably similar—
most likely be passed on to succeeding
generations. almost as similar as if they had been raised by the same parents (Plomin et al.,
1988, 1991, 1994). Fraternal twins have more differing recollections of their early
family life—even if raised in the same family! “Children experience us as differ-
ent parents, depending on their own qualities,” noted Sandra Scarr (1990).
Recall that genes can be either active (expressed, as the hot water activates the
tea bag) or inactive. Epigenetics (meaning “in addition to” or “above and beyond”
genetics), studies the molecular mechanisms by which environments can trig-
ger or block genetic expression. Our experiences create epigenetic marks, which
are often organic methyl molecules attached to part of a DNA strand (FIGURE
2.31
6.3 ).).IfIfaamark
markinstructs
instructsthe thecell
cellto
to ignore
ignore any
any gene
gene present
present in that DNA segment,
those genes will be “turned off”—they will prevent the DNA from producing the
proteins coded by that gene. As one geneticist said, “Things written in pen you
can’t change. That’s DNA. But things written in pencil you can. That’s epigenetics”
(Reed, 2011).
Environmental factors such as diet, drugs, and
Genes stress can affect the epigenetic molecules that regu-
late gene expression. Mother rats normally lick their
infants. Deprived of this licking in experiments,
infant rats had more epigenetic molecules block-
ing access to their brain’s “on” switch for develop-
ing stress hormone receptors. When stressed, those
animals had above-average levels of free-floating
Prenatal drugs, toxins, stress hormones and were more stressed (Cham-
nutrition, stress pagne et al., 2003; Champagne & Mashoodh, 2009).
Epigenetics research may solve some scientific
mysteries, such as why only one member of an iden-
Postnatal neglect, abuse,
variations in care tical twin pair may develop a genetically influenced
mental disorder, and how childhood abuse leaves its
fingerprints in a person’s brain (Spector, 2012).
Juvenile social contact, Epigenetics can also help explain why identi-
environmental cal twins may look slightly different. Researchers
complexity
studying mice have found that in utero exposure
to certain chemicals can cause genetically identi-
cal twins to have different-colored fur (Dolinoy et
Adult cognitive
challenges, al., 2007). Such discoveries will be made easier by
exercise, nutrition efforts such as the National Institutes of Health–
FIGURE 6.3
2.31 funded Roadmap Epigenetics Project, a massive
Epigenetics influences gene undertaking aimed at making epigenetic data
expression Life experiences beginning in publicly available.
the womb lay down epigenetic marks— So, if Beyoncé and Jay Z’s daughter, Blue Ivy,
often organic methyl molecules—that grows up to be a popular recording artist, should
can affect the expression of any gene in we attribute her musical talent to her “superstar
the associated DNA segment. (Research Gene expression affected genes”? To her growing up in a musically rich envi-
from Champagne, 2010.) by epigenetic molecules ronment? To high expectations? The best answer
 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR 73

seems to be “All of the above.” From conception onward, we are the product of a
For a 7-minute expla-
cascade of interactions between our genetic predispositions and our surrounding nation of genes and environment, visit
environments (McGue, 2010). Our genes affect how people react to and influence LaunchPad’s Video: Behavior Genetics.
us. Forget nature versus nurture; think nature via nurture.

RETRIEVE IT

• Match the following terms to the correct explanation.

1. Epigenetics a. Study of the relative effects of our genes and our environ-
ment on our behavior.
2. Behavior genetics b. Study of environmental factors that affect how our genes
are expressed. ANSWERS: 1. b, 2. a

Evolutionary Psychology:
Understanding Human Nature
2-16
6-4 How do evolutionary psychologists use natural selection to explain
behavior tendencies?
Behavior geneticists explore the genetic and environmental roots of human differ-
ences. Evolutionary psychologists instead focus mostly on what makes us so
much alike as humans. They use Charles Darwin’s principle of natural selection
to understand the roots of behavior and mental processes. The idea, simplified,
is this:
• Organisms’ varied offspring compete for survival.
• Certain biological and behavioral variations increase organisms’ reproductive
and survival chances in their particular environment.
• Offspring that survive are more likely to pass their genes to ensuing
generations.
• Thus, over time, population characteristics may change.
To see these principles at work, let’s consider a straightforward example in foxes.

Natural Selection and Adaptation

A fox is a wild and wary animal. If you capture a fox and try to befriend it, be
careful. Stick your hand in the cage and, if the timid fox cannot flee, it may snack
on your fingers. Russian scientist Dmitry Belyaev wondered how our
human ancestors had domesticated dogs from their equally wild
wolf forebears. Might he, within a comparatively short stretch of
time, accomplish a similar feat by transforming the fearful fox into a
friendly fox?
To find out, Belyaev set to work with 30 male and 100 female foxes.
From their offspring he selected and mated the tamest 5 percent of
males and 20 percent of females. (He measured tameness by the
foxes’ responses to attempts to feed, handle, and stroke them.)
Over more than 30 generations of foxes, Belyaev and his succes-
sor, Lyudmila Trut, repeated that simple procedure. Forty years
and 45,000 foxes later, they had a new breed of foxes that, in
Trut’s (1999) words, were “docile, eager to please, and unmistak-
ably domesticated. . . . Before our eyes, ‘the Beast’ has turned
into ‘beauty,’ as the aggressive behavior of our herd’s wild [ances-
tors] entirely disappeared.” So friendly and eager for human contact Eric Isselée/Shutterstock
74 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR

were these animals, so inclined to whimper to attract attention and to lick people
mutation a random error in gene repli-
like affectionate dogs, that the cash-strapped institute seized on a way to raise
cation that leads to a change.
funds—marketing its foxes as house pets.
Over time, traits that give an individual or species a reproductive advantage
are selected and will prevail. Animal-breeding experiments manipulate genetic
selection. Dog breeders have given us sheepdogs that herd, retrievers that retrieve,
trackers that track, and pointers that point (Plomin et al., 1997). Psychologists,
too, have bred animals to be serene or reactive, quick learners or slow ones.
Does the same process work with naturally occurring selection? Does natu-
ral selection explain our human tendencies? Nature has indeed selected advan-
tageous variations from the new gene combinations produced at each human
conception plus the mutations (random errors in gene replication) that some-
times result. But the tight genetic leash that predisposes a dog’s retrieving, a cat’s
pouncing, or a bird’s nesting is looser on humans. The genes selected during our
ancestral history provide more than a long leash; they give us a great capacity to
learn and therefore to adapt to life in varied environments, from the tundra to the
jungle. Genes and experience together wire the brain. Our adaptive flexibility in
responding to different environments contributes to our fitness—our ability to
survive and reproduce.

RETRIEVE IT

• How are Belyaev and Trut’s breeding practices similar to, and how do they differ from, the
way natural selection normally occurs?
to reproduction and survival.
selection is much slower, and normally favors traits (including those arising from mutations) that contribute
desired: tameness. This process is similar to naturally occurring selection, but it differs in that natural
ANSWER: Over multiple generations, Belyaev and Trut selected and bred foxes that exhibited a trait they

Evolutionary Success Helps Explain Similarities

Our behavioral and biological similarities arise from our shared human genome,
our common genetic profile. How did we develop our genetic kinship?
Differences grab OUR GENETIC LEGACY At the dawn of human history,
attention, but our our ancestors faced certain questions: Who is my ally, who
similarities run is my foe? With whom should I mate? What food should
deep Lucky Diamond I eat? Some individuals answered those questions more
Rich, born Gregory successfully than others. For example, women who expe-
Paul McLaren, is a New rienced nausea in the critical first three months of preg-
Zealand performance nancy were genetically predisposed to avoid certain bitter,
artist. He has held the strongly flavored, and novel foods. Avoiding such foods
world record for the has survival value, since they are the very foods most often
most tattoos. But he toxic to prenatal development (Profet, 1992; Schmitt &
also shares a common Pilcher, 2004). Early humans disposed to eat nourishing
human concern for dis- rather than poisonous foods survived to contribute their
Gareth McConnell/eyevine/Redux

advantaged children. genes to later generations. Those who deemed leopards

“nice to pet” often did not.
Similarly successful were those whose mating helped
them produce and nurture offspring. Over generations,
the genes of individuals not so disposed tended to be lost
from the human gene pool. As success-enhancing genes
continued to be selected, behavioral tendencies and think-
ing and learning capacities emerged that prepared our Stone Age ancestors to
survive, reproduce, and send their genes into the future, and into you.
As inheritors of this prehistoric legacy, we are genetically predisposed
to behave in ways that promoted our ancestors’ surviving and reproducing.
 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR 75

But in some ways, we are biologically prepared for a world that no longer exists. Despite high infant mortality and rampant
We face problems our ancestors could not imagine, such as how to create the disease in past millennia, not one of your
perfect online dating profile or how to overcome the urge to constantly check countless ancestors died childless.
our smart phones (Parkinson & Wheatley, 2015). We love the taste of sweets
and fats, nutrients that prepared our physically active ancestors to survive food
shortages. But few of us now hunt and gather our food. Too often, we search for Those who are troubled by an apparent
sweets and fats in fast-food outlets and vending machines. Our natural disposi- conflict between scientific and religious
tions, rooted deep in history, are mismatched with today’s junk-food and often accounts of human origins may find
inactive lifestyle. it helpful to consider that different
perspectives of life can be complementary.
EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY TODAY Darwin’s theory of evolution has For example, the scientific account
become one of biology’s organizing principles. “Virtually no contemporary attempts to tell us when and how;
scientists believe that Darwin was basically wrong,” noted Jared Diamond religious creation stories usually aim to tell
(2001). Today, Darwin’s theory lives on in the second Darwinian revolution, about an ultimate who and why. As Galileo
the application of evolutionary principles to psychology. In concluding On explained to the Grand Duchess Christina,
the Origin of Species, Darwin (1859, p. 346) anticipated this, foreseeing “open “The Bible teaches how to go to heaven,
fields for far more important researches. Psychology will be based on a not how the heavens go.”
new foundation.”
Elsewhere in this text, we address questions that intrigue evolu-
tionary psychologists: Why do infants start to fear strangers
about the time they become mobile? Why are biological
fathers so much less likely than unrelated boyfriends
to abuse and murder the children with whom they
Jacob Hamblin/Shutterstock
share a home? Why do so many more people have
phobias about spiders, snakes, and heights than
about more dangerous threats, such as guns
and electricity? And why do we fear air travel so
much more than driving?
***
We know from our correspondence and from surveys that some readers are
troubled by the naturalism and evolutionism of contemporary science. (A note
to readers from other nations: In the United States there is a wide gulf between
scientific and lay thinking about evolution.) “The idea that human minds are the
product of evolution is . . . unassailable fact,” declared a 2007 editorial in Nature,
a leading science journal. In The Language of God, Human Genome Project direc-
tor Francis Collins (2006, pp. 141, 146), a self-described evangelical Christian,
compiled the “utterly compelling” evidence that led him to conclude that Darwin’s
big idea is “unquestionably correct.” Yet Gallup pollsters report that 42 percent of
U.S. adults believe that humans were created “pretty much in their present form”
within the last 10,000 years (Newport, 2014). Many people who dispute the scien-
tific story worry that a science of behavior (and evolutionary science in particu-
lar) will destroy our sense of the beauty, mystery, and spiritual significance of the
human creature. For those concerned, we offer some reassuring thoughts.
When Isaac Newton explained the rainbow in terms of light of differing
wavelengths, the British poet John Keats feared that Newton had destroyed the
rainbow’s mysterious beauty. Yet, as evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins
(1998) noted in Unweaving the Rainbow, Newton’s analysis led to an even deeper
mystery—Einstein’s theory of special relativity. Nothing about Newton’s optics
need diminish our appreciation for the dramatic elegance of a rainbow arching
across a brightening sky.
When Galileo assembled evidence that Earth revolved around the Sun, not
vice versa, he did not offer irrefutable proof for his theory. Rather, he offered a
coherent explanation for a variety of observations, such as the changing shadows
cast by the Moon’s mountains. His explanation eventually won the day because
it described and explained things in a way that made sense, that hung together.
76 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR

Darwin’s theory of evolution likewise is a coherent view of natural history. It

offers an organizing principle that unifies various observations.
Many people of faith find the scientific idea of human origins congenial with
their spirituality. In the fifth century, St. Augustine (quoted by Wilford, 1999)
wrote, “The universe was brought into being in a less than fully formed state,
but was gifted with the capacity to transform itself from unformed matter into
a truly marvelous array of structures and life forms.” Some 1600 years later,
Pope Francis in 2014 welcomed a science-religion dialogue, saying, “Evolution in
nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires
the creation of beings that evolve.”
Meanwhile, many people of science are awestruck at the emerging under-
standing of the universe and the human creature. It boggles the mind—the entire
universe popping out of a point some 14 billion years ago, and instantly inflating
to cosmological size. Had the energy of this Big Bang been the tiniest bit less, the
universe would have collapsed back on itself. Had it been the tiniest bit more, the
result would have been a soup too thin to support life. Astronomer Sir Martin
Rees has described Just Six Numbers (1999), any one of which, if changed ever so
slightly, would produce a cosmos in which life could not exist. Had gravity been a
tad stronger or weaker, or had the weight of a carbon proton been a wee bit differ-
ent, our universe just wouldn’t have worked.
What caused this almost-too-good-to-be-true, finely tuned universe? Why is
there something rather than nothing? How did it come to be, in the words of
Harvard-Smithsonian astrophysicist Owen Gingerich (1999), “so extraordinarily
right, that it seemed the universe had been expressly designed to produce intel-
ligent, sentient beings”? On such matters, a humble, awed, scientific silence is
appropriate, suggested philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein: “Whereof one cannot
speak, thereof one must be silent” (1922, p. 189).
Rather than fearing science, we can welcome its enlarging our understanding
and awakening our sense of awe. In The Fragile Species, Lewis Thomas (1992)
described his utter amazement that Earth in time gave rise to bacteria and even-
tually to Bach’s Mass in B Minor. In a short 4 billion years, life on Earth has come
from nothing to structures as complex as a 6-billion-unit strand of DNA and the
incomprehensible intricacy of the human brain. Atoms no different from those in
a rock somehow formed dynamic entities that produce extraordinary, self-repli-
cating, information-processing systems—us (Davies, 2007). Although we appear
to have been created from dust, over eons of time, the end result is a priceless
creature, one rich with potential beyond our imagining.
 MODULE 6 GENETICS, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY, AND BEHAVIOR 77

6 REVIEW Genetics, Evolutionary Psychology, and Behavior

Learning Objectives
Test Yourself by taking a moment to answer each of these Learn- 2-14
6-2 How do twin and adoption studies help us understand the
ing Objective Questions (repeated here from within the chapter).
module). effects and interactions of nature and nurture?
Then turn to Appendix D, Complete Chapter
Module Reviews, to check your 2-15
6-3 How do heredity and environment work together?
answers. Research suggests that trying to answer these questions
on your own will improve your long-term memory of the concepts 2-16
6-4 How do evolutionary psychologists use natural selection to
explain behavior tendencies?
(McDaniel et al., 2009).
2-13
6-1 What are chromosomes, DNA, genes, and the human
genome? How do behavior geneticists explain our individual
differences?

Terms and Concepts to Remember

Test yourself on these terms by trying behavior genetics, p. 66 fraternal (dizygotic) twins, p. 68
to write down the definition in your own chromosomes, p. 66 interaction, p. 71
words before flipping back to the refer- DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), p. 66 epigenetics, p. 72
enced page to check your answers.
genes, p. 66 evolutionary psychology, p. 73
environment, p. 66 genome, p. 66 natural selection, p. 73
heredity, p. 66 identical (monozygotic) twins, p. 67 mutation, p. 74

Experience the Testing Effect

Test yourself repeatedly throughout your studies. This will not only 6. Adoption studies seek to understand genetic influences on
help you figure out what you know and don’t know; the testing itself personality. They do this mainly by
will help you learn and remember the information more effectively a. comparing adopted children with nonadopted
thanks to the testing effect. children.
b. evaluating whether adopted children’s personalities
1. The threadlike structures made largely of DNA molecules
are called . more closely resemble those of their adoptive parents
or their biological parents.
2. A small segment of DNA that codes for particular c. studying the effect of prior neglect on adopted
proteins is referred to as a . children.
3. When the mother’s egg and the father’s sperm unite, each d. studying the effect of children’s age at adoption.
contributes
7. Epigenetics is the study of the molecular mechanisms
a. one chromosome pair. by which trigger or block genetic
b. 23 chromosomes. expression.
c. 23 chromosome pairs.
8. Behavior geneticists are most interested in exploring
d. 25,000 chromosomes. (commonalities/differences) in our be-
4. Fraternal twins result when haviors. Evolutionary psychologists are most interested in
a. a single egg is fertilized by a single sperm and then
exploring (commonalities/differences).
splits. 9. Evolutionary psychologists are most likely to focus on
b. a single egg is fertilized by two sperm and then splits. a. how individuals differ from one another.
c. two eggs are fertilized by two sperm. b. ancestral hunting and gathering behaviors.
d. two eggs are fertilized by a single sperm. c. natural selection of the fittest adaptations.

5. twins share the same DNA. d. twin and adoption studies.

Find answers to these questions in Appendix E, in the back of the book.

Use to create your personalized study plan, which will

direct you to the resources that will help you most in .