Probably the most enduring question throughout the history of the social sciences pertains to how much human social behavior is a product of evolutionary, genetic, nonsocial, “natural” sorts of variables as opposed to learned sociocultural, environmental, “nurturing” variables (Hammond, 1983). Regardless of where individual social scientists themselves happen to have settled on this issue, many have offered an opinion about the prevailing position of social scientists generally on this question at various points in social science history. The present study compares these opinions, especially as they pertain to the twentieth century.

While some candidates use music in some of their campaign ads to shape individuals’ perceptions of their competence or compassion, for example, it is unclear whether the relationship between music and trait perceptions is empirically valid. Considering the importance of knowing where trait perceptions—which represent important determinants of the vote—come from and the extent to which it is possible to manipulate trait perceptions by means of music, this study investigates the effect of music on trait perceptions using data from an online survey experiment conducted between October 30 and November 12, 2020. In this experiment, 362 individuals were exposed to a random sequence of five campaign ads, either with their original music or with no music. Following each campaign ad, individuals were asked to evaluate the candidate’s competency, honesty, leadership, and compassion. The analyses reveal that music marginally affects perceptions of competency, honesty, and leadership. Moreover, music exerts no significant effect on perceptions of compassion.

The ethologically oriented method of social analysis developed by Edward Westermarck is applied to the subjects of charitable behavior, the welfare ethic, and the link between them. Westermarck dealt with these topics, but not in the depth he accorded the subjects of incest aversion, the incest prohibition, and the connection between them. Westermarck's approach to analyzing incest behavior and regulating institutions is also useful in the case of charitableness and the welfare ethic. Westermarck would have analyzed the welfare ethic as an institution derived from human nature — secundam naturam — in addition to an authoritative discipliner of behavior as proposed by Freud. Evidence is presented that this is the case with the welfare ethic in modern societies. This evidence includes the sensitivity of welfare to ethnic diversity. The latter decreases public altruism, whether expressed as charitableness to beggars, national charities, or public goods. The parochial leaning of charity and the welfare ethic is allowed for by Westermarck's empirically grounded ethics. Despite the passage of nearly a century, Edward Westermarck can still be an instructive guide to the biosociological enterprise. This continuing relevance shows what could have been, and can still be, done with the conceptual tools offered by an evolutionarily informed sociology.

I first met Tom Wiegele sometime in the early 1970s. Our chats about kindred interests became increasingly frequent thereafter, whether they occurred at professional meetings, by phone, or by letter. By 1976, when we spent some time together at the IPSA Congress in Edinburgh, I had become greatly impressed with his talents and dedication as a scholar, and with his commitment to promoting biopolitical study.

In November 1998, Michigan voters rejected Proposal B, a citizen initiative that would have legalized physician-assisted suicide (PAS). Although polls had long indicated overwhelming support for PAS, support for Proposal B declined before the election. We analyzed exit-poll data to characterize opponents, supporters, and cross-over voters. We then compared our results with those from earlier research that examined attitudinal and socio-demographic influences. We found that many presumptive PAS supporters did not vote for Proposal B. These data may call into question prospects for similar initiatives.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has prompted numerous gender and sexuality controversies. We describe and analyze those involving assisted reproductive technologies (ART). ART in the United States has been regulated in piecemeal fashion, with oversight primarily by individual states. While leaving state authority largely intact, the ACA federalized key practices by establishing essential health benefits (EHBs) that regulate insurance markets and prohibit insurance-coverage denials based on pre-existing conditions. Whatever their intentions, the ACA’s drafters thus put infertility in a subtly provocative new light clinically, financially, normatively, politically, and culturally. With particular attention to normative and political dynamics embedded in plausible regulatory trajectories, we review—and attempt to preview—the ACA’s effects on infertility-related delivery of health services, on ART utilization, and on reproductive medicine as a factor in American society.

Recent research suggests that contemporary American society is marked by heightened hostile racial rhetoric, alongside increasing salience of White nationalists who justify an ideology of racial hierarchy with claims of biological superiority. Media coverage of such genetics research has often emphasized a deterministic (or causal) narrative by suggesting that specific genes directly increase negative outcomes and highlighting reported genetic differences between racial groups. Across two experimental studies, we examine the effect of the media’s portrayal of scientific findings linking genes with negative health and behavioral outcomes on measures of racism. We find that deterministic genetic attributions for health and behavioral outcomes can lead to more negative racial out-group attitudes. Importantly, we also investigate potential interventions in the presentation of genetic science research. Our research has implications for understanding racial attitudes and racialized ideology in contemporary American politics, as well as for framing scientific communication in intergroup contexts.

Tomonori Morikawa, James E. Hanley, and John Orbell have argued that natural selection leads populations who play Hawk-Dove, a game-theoretic stylization of confrontation, to develop the capacity for various “orders of recognition.” Such an argument requires a model linking game play to the presence or absence of various cognitive mechanisms. Morikawa and colleagues present such a model but, I argue, leave it incomplete, unable to sustain the conclusions they wish to defend. The development of a more fully specified model would significantly assist future studies of cognitive structures related to game play.

This essay represents our latest annual update of the biopolitical literature and of related developments (see also Somit et al., 1980; Peterson, Somit, and Slagter, 1982; Peterson, Somit, and Brown, 1983; Peterson and Somit, 1984). Our count for 1984 is 78 items: 3 monographs or books (Axelrod, 1984; Blank 1984f; Vanhanen, 1984a), 13 articles, 2 chapters in a book, 44 conference papers, 16 review essays, commentaries, etc., and 0 master's theses or Ph.D. dissertations.

Tom Wiegele was a class act. Tall, white-haired, distinguished, thoughtful, and, above all, principled, he appeared too good to be true. Tom exemplified that precious and, it sometimes seems, increasingly rare combination, a gentleman and a scholar.