Using frequentist and Bayesian multi-level models in a sample of two international samples, the authors test whether there are significant sex differences in moral judgments across a large-scale examination of countries. They compare men and women using the five components of the Moral Foundations Theory: 1) care, (2) fairness, (3) loyalty, (4) authority, and (5) purity. In addition, they study the differences when considering socioeconomic and gender-equality status. The results partially support the presence of significant sex differences. While care, fairness, and purity were consistently higher for women; loyalty and authority were highly variable. The study also shows that there are larger sex differences in moral judgments across more individualist, WEIRD, and gender-equal societies.

Using frequentist and Bayesian multi-level models in a sample of two international samples, the authors test whether there are significant sex differences in moral judgments across a large-scale examination of countries. They compare men and women using the five components of the Moral Foundations Theory: 1) care, (2) fairness, (3) loyalty, (4) authority, and (5) purity. In addition, they study the differences when considering socioeconomic and gender-equality status. The results partially support the presence of significant sex differences. While care, fairness, and purity were consistently higher for women; loyalty and authority were highly variable. The study also shows that there are larger sex differences in moral judgments across more individualist, WEIRD, and gender-equal societies.

Using frequentist and Bayesian multi-level models in a sample of two international samples, the authors test whether there are significant sex differences in moral judgments across a large-scale examination of countries. They compare men and women using the five components of the Moral Foundations Theory: 1) care, (2) fairness, (3) loyalty, (4) authority, and (5) purity. In addition, they study the differences when considering socioeconomic and gender-equality status. The results partially support the presence of significant sex differences. While care, fairness, and purity were consistently higher for women; loyalty and authority were highly variable. The study also shows that there are larger sex differences in moral judgments across more individualist, WEIRD, and gender-equal societies.

Using frequentist and Bayesian multi-level models in a sample of two international samples, the authors test whether there are significant sex differences in moral judgments across a large-scale examination of countries. They compare men and women using the five components of the Moral Foundations Theory: 1) care, (2) fairness, (3) loyalty, (4) authority, and (5) purity. In addition, they study the differences when considering socioeconomic and gender-equality status. The results partially support the presence of significant sex differences. While care, fairness, and purity were consistently higher for women; loyalty and authority were highly variable. The study also shows that there are larger sex differences in moral judgments across more individualist, WEIRD, and gender-equal societies.

In this paper, the author argues that moral systems evolved as a way to enforce cooperation between people outside of kin groups. Because cooperation within kin groups has apparent adaptive advantages, it is argued that these moral systems will be less important for societies with tight kin groups and conversely more important for those with looser kin groups. In order to test this theory, the author creates an original model that incorporates both ethnographic data and data from contemporary countries. Thus, it is postulated that historical kinship practices will influence contemporary systems. The paper concludes that there is sufficient historical evidence for this theory.

In this paper, the author argues that moral systems evolved as a way to enforce cooperation between people outside of kin groups. Because cooperation within kin groups has apparent adaptive advantages, it is argued that these moral systems will be less important for societies with tight kin groups and conversely more important for those with looser kin groups. In order to test this theory, the author creates an original model that incorporates both ethnographic data and data from contemporary countries. Thus, it is postulated that historical kinship practices will influence contemporary systems. The paper concludes that there is sufficient historical evidence for this theory.

In order to explore the evolution of mutually beneficial transactions in large societies, this experimental study gathered data on the way people in societies of different subsistence types played games simulating interactions with anonymous others. The degree of fairness displayed by different players was correlated with measures of large-scale institutions, such as a market or world religion, that were present in a player’s society. Results suggest that “modern prosociality is not solely the product of an innate psychology, but also reflects norms and institutions that have emerged over the course of human history” (1480).

In order to explore the evolution of mutually beneficial transactions in large societies, this experimental study gathered data on the way people in societies of different subsistence types played games simulating interactions with anonymous others. The degree of fairness displayed by different players was correlated with measures of large-scale institutions, such as a market or world religion, that were present in a player’s society. Results suggest that “modern prosociality is not solely the product of an innate psychology, but also reflects norms and institutions that have emerged over the course of human history” (1480).

In this article, the authors seek to test the theory that the veiling of women is a form of male mate guarding strategy, especially in harsh environments (specifically those with poor health and high mortality). They test this hypothesis using survey data drawn from 25 majority Muslim countries. This theory found support in the results of their statistical tests. In addition to testing the hypotheses articulated in the paper (as noted above), they also ran correlations between income level, importance of religion, and a countries sex ratio and views on the importance of veiling.

This article presents the results of economic behavior experiments conducted on members of 15 small scale societies. Although three different economic experiments were conducted, findings focus on the results of the "Ultimatum Game." The authors found that no society adhered to behavior predicted by the "selfishness axiom" which suggests that individuals will behave in a way that maximizes their own gain. Authors also discuss possible predictors of behavioral variation within and between groups.