Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-88psn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-15T15:48:09.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Parasite-stress promotes in-group assortative sociality: The cases of strong family ties and heightened religiosity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2012

Corey L. Fincher
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131. fincher@unm.edu http://biology.unm.edu/fincher
Randy Thornhill
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131 rthorn@unm.edu http://biology.unm.edu/Thornhill/rthorn.htm

Abstract

Throughout the world people differ in the magnitude with which they value strong family ties or heightened religiosity. We propose that this cross-cultural variation is a result of a contingent psychological adaptation that facilitates in-group assortative sociality in the face of high levels of parasite-stress while devaluing in-group assortative sociality in areas with low levels of parasite-stress. This is because in-group assortative sociality is more important for the avoidance of infection from novel parasites and for the management of infection in regions with high levels of parasite-stress compared with regions of low infectious disease stress. We examined this hypothesis by testing the predictions that there would be a positive association between parasite-stress and strength of family ties or religiosity. We conducted this study by comparing among nations and among states in the United States of America. We found for both the international and the interstate analyses that in-group assortative sociality was positively associated with parasite-stress. This was true when controlling for potentially confounding factors such as human freedom and economic development. The findings support the parasite-stress theory of sociality, that is, the proposal that parasite-stress is central to the evolution of social life in humans and other animals.

Information

Type
Target Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Supplementary material: PDF

Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material

Electronic supplement 1

Download Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 104.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material

Electronic supplement 2

Download Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material(File)
File 38.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material

Electronic supplement 3

Download Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material(File)
File 14.3 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material

Electronic supplement 4

Download Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 58.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material

Electronic supplement 5

Download Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material(File)
File 21.5 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material

Electronic supplement 6

Download Fincher and Thornhill supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 87.3 KB