Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25299885›Full record

ReviewEvolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior2014

An evolutionary model of the environmental conditions that shape the development of prosociality.

Daniel Tumminelli O'Brien

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. An introduction to evolutionary developmental psychology.Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel Tumminelli O'BrienRadcliffe Institute of Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Harvard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current review presents a model for how prosocial development is driven by sociocognitive mechanisms that have been shaped by natural selection to translate critical environmental factors into locally adaptive levels of prosociality. This is done through a synthesis of two existing literatures. Evolutionary developmental psychologists have demonstrated a biological basis for the emergence of prosocial behavior early in youth, and work based on social learning theory has explored how social experiences can influence prosociality across development. The model forwarded organizes this latter literature in a way that is specific to how the biological mechanisms underpinning prosociality have evolved. This consists of two main psychological mechanisms. 1) A domain-specific program that is responsive to environmental factors that determine the relative success of different levels of prosociality. It uses the local prevalence of prosocial others (i.e., support) and expectations for prosocial behavior (i.e., structure) to guide prosocial development. 2) The domain-general process of cultural learning, by which youth adopt local social norms based on the examples of others. Implications and hypotheses are articulated for both the sociocognitive structure of the individual and the role of social contexts.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionModels, TheoreticalPsychology, DevelopmentalSocial BehaviorAdolescentAdolescent BehaviorHumansSocial Environment

Identifiers

PMID25299885
PMCPMC10481065
OpenAlexW2236347803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.