Evolution and relationships: A call for integration

In this introduction to the special issue on evolutionary approaches to relationships, we first review some of the major theories and milestones that have shaped and informed modern evolutionary thinking. In doing so, we discuss some of the major evolutionary theories that are most relevant to interpersonal relationships, and we describe how these theories are structurally linked. We then discuss the importance of theorizing about and studying phenomena from multiple levels of explanation–ultimate, ontogenetic, and proximate. Several misconceptions that continue to plague evolutionary psychology are then discussed, and we suggest ways in which evolutionary psychologists have unwittingly created, perpetuated, or sometimes exacerbated certain misconceptions. We conclude that the science of relationships could benefit from an infusion of more evolutionary thinking, and we propose that evolutionary psychology could benefit by having more relationship researchers.     

Linguistic styles and complementarities in analyzing character

This paper discusses and illustrates some technical implications of D. Liberman's contributions to character analysis. Psychoanalysis is an extended conversation, and character structure is expressed linguistically as part of an interactive linguistic fi eld. Liberman's notions of linguistic styles and communicative interaction defi ne a unique analytic surface from which to examine the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic aspects of character. The presence of a rigid and defensive linguistic style refl ects resistance and communicative impasse within the transference and countertransference matrix. A fully interactive communicative experience integrates all aspects of the conversation and allows both participants to take part in a shared semantic fi eld, the precondition to the generation of new meanings. Liberman suggests responding to miscommunication by means of a methodical linguistic attitude. Various such complementary responses are explored through several vignettes, with a particular focus on the interplay of the epic and narrative modes.     

A Critical Analysis of the Behavioral Adaptation Explanation of the Probing Effect

Deception researchers interested in the effects of interrogative probing repeatedly have documented that probed sources are rated as more honest than nonprobed sources. This finding has been labeled “the probing effect.” The commonly accepted explanation for the probing effect is the behavioral adaptation explanation (BAE). The BAE posits that probing causes message sources to strategically adapt behavioral cues so as to appear “honest.” This behavioral adaptation subsequently causes message recipients to perceive probed sources as truthful. Across several published studies and convention papers, researchers have claimed empirical support for the BAE. This report documents three problems with the BAE that, taken together, suggest that the BAE cannot account for the probing effect.     

RAWLS AND THE STATUS OF POLITICAL LIBERTY

Abstract:  In his late work, Rawls makes strong claims about the status of political liberty. These claims, if accepted, would have significant implications for the content of "justice as fairness." I discuss the nature of these claims, clarifying Rawls's fair value guarantee of the political liberties and critically discussing the arguments that he and others have given for assigning special importance to the political liberties. I conclude that justice as fairness, properly understood, is not a deeply democratic conception of justice.     

Item Desirability Effects in Compliance-Gaining Research Seven Studies Documenting Artifacts in the Strategy Selection Procedure

A popular method for assessing compliance-gaming behavior involves having people rate lists of preformulated message strategies for likelihood of use. This “selection procedure” has been employed much more frequently than the alternative “construction procedure,” a method that requires people to generate their own message strategies. The present article argues that the selection procedure is much less sensitive than the construction procedure to the effects of situational and individual-difference variables on compliance-gaining behavior. The article further suggests that the insensitivity of the selection procedure is due to a type of social desirability bias known as the item desirability effect. Seven studies were carried out testing the Marwell and Schmitt (1967) and Wiseman and Schenk-Hamlin (1 981) strategy checklists for the item desirability effect. These studies found that (a) the likelihood of use ratings prouided for the strategies on both checklists could be accurately predicted by the rated social appropriateness of the strategies, (b) likelihood of use ratingsfor preforrnulated strategies haue relatively poor reliability, and (c) the construction procedure is much less susceptible to social desirability biases than the selection procedure. On the basis of these and related findings, it is recommended that researchers eschew the use of strategy checklists in future research.