Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:27:56.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Understanding self-deception demands a co-evolutionary framework

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2011

Steven W. Gangestad
Steven W. Gangestad
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131. [email protected]://www.unm.edu/~psych/faculty/sm_gangestad.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The foundational theme of the target article is that processes of self-deception occur in a functional context: a social one through which self-deceptive processes enhance fitness by affecting an actor's performances. One essential component of this context not addressed explicitly is that audiences should have been selected to resist, where possible, enhancements falsely bolstered by self-deception. Theoretical implications follow.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , February 2011 , pp. 23 - 24
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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.)

References

Rice, W. R. & Holland, B. (1997) The enemies within: Intragenomic conflict, interlocus contest evolution (ICE), and the intraspecific Red Queen. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 41:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searcy, W. A. & Nowicki, S. (2005) The evolution of animal communication: Reliability and deception in signaling systems. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. (1985) Deceit and self-deception. In: Social evolution, pp. 395–420. Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar