The Hunting Handicap Compat


Published on

This was a presentation for an anthropological theory class. The article is truly interesting, albeit repetitive. It is just a general, bare bones, of what the article was all about.

Published in: Business, Technology
1 Comment
  • the third bullet point on slide 7, instead of the random letters should read; 'But only works if women (shellfish collectors) maintain a cooperative relationship with spear fishers.
    -Also, shellfish is shared with the entire patriline, not just the ‘nuclear family’, not just the spear fishers.'
    Apologies for the error. I didn't feel like reloading the ppt,
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The Hunting Handicap Compat

    1. 1. Sociobiology, Evolutionary Psychology, and Behavioral Ecology By: Bird, Smith, & Bird Presentation by Ashlee D
    2. 2. <ul><li>Foragers (human and not) will choose foods that offer the maximal energy return for the minimal energy investment. (415) </li></ul><ul><li>-The article intends to explain instances in which OFT don’t work and provide an ulterior explanation. </li></ul>Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT)
    3. 3. The Question: <ul><li>Why do some Meriam hunters choose to go after prey that is low in nutritional return and is also hard to get? </li></ul>
    4. 4. <ul><li>“ Serves as an honest signal” (416) </li></ul><ul><li>Proposes that communication between individuals with conflicting interests can be evolutionarily stable if the signal honestly advertises an underlying quality of interest to observers. </li></ul>Costly Signaling Theory (CST)
    5. 5. Criteria for hunts to meet CST <ul><li>Differentially costly or beneficial in ways that are </li></ul><ul><li>Honestly linked to signaler quality </li></ul><ul><li>Designed to effectively broadcast the signal to the intended audience (i.e: potential allies, mates, and competitors) </li></ul>
    6. 6. Spear-fishing <ul><li>Men forgo shellfish collecting to spear-fish </li></ul><ul><li>Though shellfish collecting would maximize energy in, while minimizing energy out. </li></ul><ul><li>Searching for fish (to spear) takes a lot of time and energy and has little energy return. </li></ul>
    7. 7. Why? Spear-fishing continued <ul><li>They are maximizing other nutrients </li></ul><ul><ul><li>BUT protein and fat is higher in shellfish </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Other benefits (unrelated to consumption) such as good trade item </li></ul><ul><ul><li>But, shellfish produces larger harvest and is more likely to be shared </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Provides greater consumption benefits long run </li></ul><ul><ul><li>kfsdjm </li></ul></ul>
    8. 8. Turtles! <ul><li>Collecting </li></ul><ul><li>Hunting </li></ul>VS
    9. 9. Turtle hunting may involve: <ul><li>“ High opportunity costs in the form of passing over opportunities to acquire other resources with higher rate of return. </li></ul><ul><li>Low consumption return rates because the hunters distribute to non-hunters </li></ul><ul><li>High energetic, monetary, or time investment costs of preparing for and conducting the hunt that reduce energetic return rates below that of more easily acquired resources” (423) </li></ul>
    10. 10. The (honest) signals given: <ul><li>Spear-fishing </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hand-eye coordination </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stealth </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Patience </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Turtle hunting </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Strength, stamina, risk taking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitive skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Leadership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Generosity </li></ul></ul>
    11. 11. Some problems: <ul><li>Where are the interviews with the people? </li></ul><ul><li>Phenotypic traits </li></ul><ul><li>Ideas/explanations that couldn’t be tested or were not tested/completed at time of publication </li></ul>
    12. 12. Food for thought