TY - JOUR
T1 - Theoretical constraints
T2 - Science, caretaking, and the creation of normative ideals
AU - Nelson, Robin G.
N1 - Funding Information:
Thank you to Andrea Wiley and Jennifer Cullin for organizing the seminar at the School for Advanced Research from which this paper developed. I would also like to thank SAR for providing our group the opportunity to think through these ideas. Thank you to the reviewers for their comments, and help in strengthening the arguments made in this article. All errors and/or omissions are my own.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
PY - 2021/9/1
Y1 - 2021/9/1
N2 - Objectives: This review explores the dualism in evolutionary anthropology that both acknowledges a broad range of familial caretaking strategies, while also remaining tethered to theories scaffolded around notions of selfish genes that constrain our understanding of who provides adequate kin care. I examine the process of norm creation in the sciences by investigating how theory may limit which data are collected and how those data are interpreted. Methods: This paper serves as a literature review and critique of prominent biological, evolutionary, and psychological conceptualizations of parental investment and caretaking in humans, and how these studies shape what is considered normal behavior in scientific literature. Results: Quantification, assessment, and theory building in evolutionary anthropology, and an oversampling of WEIRD communities in other disciplines, have limited our understanding of what constitutes both evolutionarily adaptive behaviors, and culturally specific human behaviors. Conclusions: A synthetic theoretical model of behavioral norms in childrearing must account for an exchange of psycho-social and cultural resources and skills, the transfer of energetic reserves via gestation and lactation, and the indirect benefits of genetic inheritance. The emphasis on tailoring data collection to fit evolutionary theories of the family has limited our ability to understand the diverse proximate mechanisms that humans employ in taking care of kin as biocultural reproducers.
AB - Objectives: This review explores the dualism in evolutionary anthropology that both acknowledges a broad range of familial caretaking strategies, while also remaining tethered to theories scaffolded around notions of selfish genes that constrain our understanding of who provides adequate kin care. I examine the process of norm creation in the sciences by investigating how theory may limit which data are collected and how those data are interpreted. Methods: This paper serves as a literature review and critique of prominent biological, evolutionary, and psychological conceptualizations of parental investment and caretaking in humans, and how these studies shape what is considered normal behavior in scientific literature. Results: Quantification, assessment, and theory building in evolutionary anthropology, and an oversampling of WEIRD communities in other disciplines, have limited our understanding of what constitutes both evolutionarily adaptive behaviors, and culturally specific human behaviors. Conclusions: A synthetic theoretical model of behavioral norms in childrearing must account for an exchange of psycho-social and cultural resources and skills, the transfer of energetic reserves via gestation and lactation, and the indirect benefits of genetic inheritance. The emphasis on tailoring data collection to fit evolutionary theories of the family has limited our ability to understand the diverse proximate mechanisms that humans employ in taking care of kin as biocultural reproducers.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85110997895&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85110997895&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/ajhb.23650
DO - 10.1002/ajhb.23650
M3 - Review article
C2 - 34291528
AN - SCOPUS:85110997895
SN - 1042-0533
VL - 33
JO - American Journal of Human Biology
JF - American Journal of Human Biology
IS - 5
M1 - e23650
ER -