Cited by 393Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionPhilosophy and History of Science

Adapting minds: evolutionary psychology and the persistent quest for human nature

David J. Buller·2005·Choice Reviews Online

Abstract

Was human nature designed by natural selection in the Pleistocene epoch? The dominant view in evolutionary psychology holds that it was--that our psychological adaptations were designed tens of thousands of years ago to solve problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors. In this provocative and lively book, David Buller examines in detail the major claims of evolutionary psychology - the paradigm popularised by Steven Pinker in The Blank Slate and by David Buss in The Evolution of Desire - and rejects them all. This does not mean that we cannot apply evolutionary theory to human psychology, says Buller, but that the conventional wisdom in evolutionary psychology is misguided. Evolutionary psychology employs a kind of reverse engineering to explain the evolved design of the mind, figuring out the adaptive problems our ancestors faced and then inferring the psychological adaptations that evolved to solve them. Evolutionary psychologists claim many discoveries based on this approach, including the evolutionary rationale for human mate preferences (that males prefer nubile females and females prefer high-status males) and discriminative parental solicitude (the idea that stepparents abuse their stepchildren at a higher rate than genetic parents abuse their biological children). In the carefully argued central chapters of Adapting Minds, Buller scrutinises several of evolutionary psychology's most highly publicised discoveries. Drawing on a wide range of empirical research, inc…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5860/choice.43-1249

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A science of change can occur only when the distinction between evolutionary psychology and the standard social science model is depolarized.

    “Only when we depolarize the distinction between EP and the SSSM can a science of change occur (Bolhuis et al. 2011; Buller 2005; Scher & Rauscher 2002; Wilson 2002b).”

    From Evolving the future: Toward a science of intentional change (2014) · cites this paper as Buller 2005

  • Relations between stepparents and stepchildren are likely to be especially problematic because there is no genetic interest at all.

    “Relations between stepparents and stepchildren are likely to be especially problematic, because there is no genetic interest at all (Daly & Wilson 1988; 2001; but see Buller 2005).”

    From Evolving the future: Toward a science of intentional change (2014) · cites this paper as Buller 2005

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buller, D. J.
Corresponding author
David J. Buller
Venue
Choice Reviews Online
Published
2005-10-01
Volume
43
Issue
02
Pages
43-1249-43-1249
ISSN
  • 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-8253
OpenAlex
W1712215397
Cited by
393
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 26
Type
book review
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Choice Reviews Online (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
Keywords
evolutionary psychology, human nature, psychological adjustment, Pleistocene, reverse engineering, mate preferences, child abuse, Steven Pinker, critique of evolutionary psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review