Vigil suggests that expressed emotions are inherently learned and triggered in social contexts. A strict reading of this account is not consistent with the findings that individuals, even those who are congenitally blind, do express emotions in the absence of an audience. Rather, grounded cognition suggests that facial expressions might also be an embodied support used to represent emotional information.

Del Giudice provides an extension of the life history theory of attachment that incorporates emerging data suggestive of sex differences in avoidant male and preoccupied female attachment patterns emerging in middle childhood. This commentary considers the place of disorganized attachment within this theory and why male children may be more prone to disorganized attachment by drawing on Trivers's parental investment theory.

Carruthers presents an interesting analysis of confabulation and a clear attack on introspection. Yet his theory-based alternative is a mechanistic view of “mindreading” which neglects the fact that social understanding occurs within a network of social relationships. In particular, the role of language in his model is too simple.

Rather than being a genuine adaptation, “positive illusions” are examples of doxastically uncommitted policies implemented at both the individual and societal levels. Even when they are genuine misbeliefs, most positive illusions are not evolved but ephemeral – a phenomenon limited to a particular social and economic moment. They are essentially a consumer response to messages from the pop-psychology industry in the recently terminated era of easy credit.

Archer's argument regarding sex differences in partner violence rests on a general account of between-sex differences in reproductive strategies and in social roles. However, men's partner-directed violence often is predicted by perceived risk of female infidelity. We hypothesize that men's partner-directed violence is produced by psychological mechanisms evolved to solve the adaptive problem of paternity uncertainty.

McKay & Dennett (M&D) have done an admirable job of distinguishing among various forms of misbelief and evaluating the idea that they stem from evolved mental mechanisms. We argue that a complete account of misbeliefs must attend to the role that others play in creating and maintaining positive illusions.

In addition to the socio-relational framework of expressive behaviors (SRFB), we recommend integrating theoretical and empirical findings based on attachment theory. We advocate a dynamic interpretation of early caregiver–child interaction. The consequences of models from developmental psychology for the occurrence of psychopathology are demonstrated from a clinical perspective.

Our research in China does not show gender differences in insecure attachment patterns. We believe that cultural differences between Chinese and Western societies may help to explain this phenomenon. Mating and parenting circumstances in China do not allow males to adopt a zero-investment strategy. In addition, attachment styles are transmitted across generations and last for the whole lifespan. Here, we argue that the influence of mating and parenting on the well-developed attachment patterns in childhood is relatively small.

Carruthers' “mindreading is prior” model postulates one unitary mindreading mechanism working identically for self and other. While we agree about shared mindreading mechanisms, there is also evidence from neuroimaging and mentalizing about dissimilar others that suggest factors that differentially affect self-versus-other mentalizing. Such dissociations suggest greater complexity than the mindreading is prior model allows.

Quantitative genetic studies of human aggressive behavior only partly support the claim of social role theory that individual differences in aggressive behavior are learnt rather than innate. As to its heritable component, future studies on the genetic architecture of aggressive behavior across different contexts could shed more light on the evolutionary origins of male-female versus male-male aggression.

Given the strength of Archer's case for a sexual selection account, he is too accommodating of the social roles alternative. We present data on historical changes in violent crime contradicting that perspective, and discuss recent evidence showing how an evolutionary perspective predicts sex similarities and differences responding in a flexible and functional manner to adaptively relevant triggers across different domains.

Research with nonhuman primates can make important contributions to life history models of human attachment and reproductive strategies, such as: including parental responsiveness into female reproductive strategies, testing the assumption that adult attachment is a reproductive adaptation, assessing genetic and environmental effects on attachment and reproduction, and investigating the mechanisms through which early stress results in accelerated reproductive maturation.

We question a central premise upon which the target article is based. Namely, we point out that the evidence for “positive illusions” is in fact quite mixed. As such, the question of whether positive illusions are adaptive from an evolutionary standpoint may be premature in light of the fact that their very existence may be an illusion.

I argue that the very reasons Carruthers gives for why the “mindreading is prior” account should allow introspective access to perceptual/quasi-perceptual states, can be given for thought, as well. I also argue that we have good subjectively accessible grounds for the intuition in introspective thoughts, notwithstanding Carruthers' argument to the contrary and his attempt to explain the intuition away.

According to socio-relational theory, men and women encountered different ecologies in their evolutionary past, and, as a result of different ancestral selection pressures, they developed different patterns of emotional expressivity that have persisted across cultures and large human evolutionary time scales. We question these assumptions, and propose that social-cognitive models of individual differences more parsimoniously account for sex differences in emotional expressivity.

Del Giudice's model belongs among those that highlight the role of adaptive developmental plasticity in human reproductive strategies; but at least three other forms of evolutionary adaptation also influence reproductive behavior. Similar to earlier models, the existing evidence suggests that Del Giudice's hypothesized effects are rather weak. In particular, adult attachment styles are hardly predictive of outcomes visible to natural selection.

Archer recognizes that sexual selection theory is sensitive to the effects of ecologies on sex differences, yet he does not explain the impact of such variation. For example, to what degree are there sex differences in aggression in polygynous and monogamous societies? I demonstrate how differences in mating perceptions affect the traditional dichotomy that males compete for and females choose mates.

In their pursuit of adaptively biased misbelief-making systems, McKay & Dennett (M&D) describe a putative doxastic shear-pin system which enables misbeliefs to form in situations of extreme psychological stress. Rather than discussing their argument, I consider how this shear-pin system might combine with both pathological belief-making (“culpable” breakdowns caused by neuropathy) and normal belief-making to explain a spectrum of delusions.

This response shows how the socio-relational framework of expressive behaviors may be used to understand and predict social psychological processes, beyond sex differences in the expression of emotion. I use this opportunity to elaborate on several key concepts on the epigenesis of evolved social behaviors that were not fully addressed in the target article. These are: evidence of a natural history of masculine and feminine specialization (sect. R1); phenotypic plasticity and range of reactivity of social behaviors (sect. R2); exploitive and protective functions of social behaviors (sect. R3); and the role of cognition in some affective responses (sect. R4). I conclude by highlighting (in sect. R5) future directions for psychological research from a socio-relational basis.

Carruthers rejects developmental evidence based primarily on an argument regarding one skill in particular: understanding false beliefs. We propose that this rejection is premature; and that identifying and examining the development of other subcomponent skills important for metacognition and mindreading, such as the ability to assess levels of knowledge, will in fact be useful in resolving this debate.