Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorKing, James E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSefcek, Jon Adamen_US
dc.creatorSefcek, Jon Adamen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-12-06T13:20:04Z
dc.date.available2011-12-06T13:20:04Z
dc.date.issued2007en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/194693
dc.description.abstractRecent adaptationist accounts of human mental and physical health have reinvigorated the debate over the evolution of human intelligence. In the tradition of strong inference the current study was developed to determine which hypothesis; Rushton’s (2000) differential K theory, or Miller’s (2000a) fitness indicator model (F), better accounts for general intelligence ('g') in an undergraduate university population (N = 194). Due to the lengthy administration time of the test materials a newly developed 18-item short form of the Ravens Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM-18; Sefcek, Miller, & Figueredo, 2007) was used. There was a significant positive relationship between K and F (r = .31, p < .001), however no significant relationships were found between 'g' and either K or F (for each, r = -.06, p ≥ .05). While contrary to both hypotheses, these results may be explained in relation to antagonistic pleiotropy and a potential failure to derive within species comparisons directly from between species comparisons.
dc.language.isoENen_US
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.subjectEvolutionen_US
dc.subjectEvolutionary Psychologyen_US
dc.subjectLife-History Theoryen_US
dc.subjectFitness Indicator Theoryen_US
dc.subjectGeneral Intelligenceen_US
dc.subjectIntelligence Testingen_US
dc.titleA Life-History Model of Human Fitness Indicatorsen_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeElectronic Dissertationen_US
dc.contributor.chairKing, James E.en_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberFigueredo, Aurelio Joseen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberJacobs, W. Jakeen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberSteklis, H. Dieteren_US
dc.identifier.proquest2356en_US
thesis.degree.disciplinePsychologyen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.namePhDen_US
refterms.dateFOA2018-06-15T05:33:47Z
html.description.abstractRecent adaptationist accounts of human mental and physical health have reinvigorated the debate over the evolution of human intelligence. In the tradition of strong inference the current study was developed to determine which hypothesis; Rushton’s (2000) differential K theory, or Miller’s (2000a) fitness indicator model (F), better accounts for general intelligence ('g') in an undergraduate university population (N = 194). Due to the lengthy administration time of the test materials a newly developed 18-item short form of the Ravens Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM-18; Sefcek, Miller, & Figueredo, 2007) was used. There was a significant positive relationship between K and F (r = .31, p < .001), however no significant relationships were found between 'g' and either K or F (for each, r = -.06, p ≥ .05). While contrary to both hypotheses, these results may be explained in relation to antagonistic pleiotropy and a potential failure to derive within species comparisons directly from between species comparisons.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
azu_etd_2356_sip1_m.pdf
Size:
462.6Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
azu_etd_2356_sip1_m.pdf

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record