Research in moral psychology has focused on understanding what factors assist in the development of moral action and decision making. Examples of these research factors include educational experiences (Rest et al, 1986), intelligence (Rest, 1979), and social networking (Derryberry & Thoma, 2000). Personality factors facilitating moral judgment have also receive attention in recent years with Damon and Hart (1988) exploring self-understanding as a possible factor in moral judgment and Baumeister and Exline (1999) proposing that exercising self-control is often characteristic of those who often employ prosocial behavior. Pizarro (2000) suggested that those who fail to utilize empathy may think about moral issues just as those who do employ empathy but find them easier to ignore. This study attempted to explore this research from a different angle by examining the relationships between antisocial personality traits as opposed to prosocial personality traits. To measure these traits, data were collected from two samples comprised of 120 college students and 24 prisoners from a state-inmate facility. The Defining Issues Test (DIT) was used to measure moral judgment and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) was used to measure the desired personality factors. The results indicated that antisocial personality characteristics do not inhibit moral judgment development. However, the results showed that individuals with antisocial personality characteristics were more likely to endorse self-serving decisions in situations that call for moral decision-making.

The following research paper was concerned with five basic objectives:(1) outlining the major theoretical and methodological approaches used in the reconstruction of early hominid social behavior/social structure as a context in which to view Richard Wrangham's and Michael Ghiglieri's phylogenetic models of stem-hominid social structure.(2) examining Wrangham's and Ghiglieri's models of stem-hominid and chimpanzee social structure.(3) indicating how theoretical and methodological aspects of structure essentially represent an extension of the theoretical and methodological approaches the same researchers applied to their models of chimpanzee social structure.(4) addressing the theoretical and methodological deficiences of Wrangham's and Ghiglieri's models of chimpanzee social structure.(5) providing suggestions for improved phylogenetic models of early hominid social structure.The first objective was achieved by: (a) reviewing Tooby and Devore's (1986) and Wrangham's (1986) evaluations of the major theoretical approaches and methodologies used in the reconstruction of hominid social behavior/structure (b) defining, classifying and evaluating Wrangham's and Ghiglieri's phylogenetic approaches within this context.The second objective was accomplished by outlining, analyzing, and comparing/contrasting Wrangham's and Ghiglieri's phylogenetic models of stem-hominid social structure (i.e.Wrangham 1986; Ghiglieri 1987, 1989) and Wrangham's and Ghiglieri's models of chimpanzee social structure (i.e. Wrangham 1975, 1979; Ghiglieri 1984, 1985, 1987, 1989).The third objective was achieved by recognizing how Wrangham and Ghiglieri used/stressed principles and concepts derived from evolutionary biology and/or behavioral ecology to develop their models of stem-hominid and chimpanzee social structure. This analysis showed that Wrangham's models of social structure were more favorably inclined toward the method of behavioral ecology than Ghiglieri's models, which favored a sociobiological paradigm. Furthermore, although neither researcher relied exclusively on the above theoretical approaches, the main thrust of their argument often centered around it. For instance, Wrangham's analysis of chimpanzee social structure (Wrangham 1975, 1979) indicated that the ultimate cause of that structure was ecological i.e., patchy food distribution leads to wide female dispersal for optimal foraging efficiency, which in turn favors a male kin breeding group that can maintain a territority that includes several individual female ranges. In contrast, Wrangham's phylogenetic model of the social structure of the stem-hominid (Wrangham, 1986) suggested that phylogenetic inertia may be partially responsible for the shared social features found among African Hominoidea. However, in the same work, Wrangham also suggested that further socioecological analysis of African apes may indicate whether food distribution and its effects on female dispersion/association may partially explain conservative African ape social features.Ghiglieri's phylogenetic model of the stem-hominid (1987, 1989), on the other hand, explained the conservative social features of bonobos, common chimpanzees, and hominids to be primarily a product of phylogenetic inertia and sexual selection. Furthermore, for Ghiglieri the most important sexual selection variable was a male communal reproductive strategy. This, according to Ghiglieri, is the ultimate cause of social structure. Notably, Ghiglieri (1984, 1985) had earlier stressed the overiding importance of a male communal reproductive strategy but was less dogmatic in his insistence that chimpanzees had essentially solved their ecological problems (e.g. that they had solved the food distribution problem by fusion-fission sociality; predators were never a real problem). Nevertheless, Ghiglieri's earlier position similarily expressed the idea that a communal reproductive strategy constituted the ultimate cause of social structure.The fourth objective was accomplished by presentation of an alternative model of chimpanzee social behavior which suggested that structure; the effect of phylogenetic inertia on social structure; chimpanzee social structure is the combined product of ecological and sexual selection forces: female optimal foraging, male mating strategies, and predator pressure. The model was considered by the author to be unique in that it integrated essential aspects of both Wrangham's and Ghiglieri's models and, in addition, provided support for Alexander's (1974) contention that predation pressure is an ultimate cause of ape social structure. The model also outlined scenarios for the evolution of chimpanzee group._ extensibility (fusion-fission sociality) and the capacity for warfare among chimpanzees.The last objective was achieved by a discussion of the implications that the author's model had for phylogenetic models of stem-hominid social structure. In this discussion the author reviewed the following issues as they related to the phylogenetic reconstruction of hominid social structure: the role of phylogeny and/or ecology in the causation of social encountered when using a phylogenetic referential model for the personal biases that enter into phylogenetic econstructions; pitfalls reconstruction of early hominid social evolution; the significance of chimpanzee models of social structure.The importance of the preceding study lay in its ability to stimulate improved conceptual models of African hominoid social structure. / Department of Anthropology

The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between perceived child rear ing practices and the moral character or pro-social behavior of students in their late teens and early twenties. A questionnaire was administered to forty - eight students to test their moral character which was the dependent variable on the following traits : ambitious , broadminded , capable , cheerful , clean , courageous , forgiving , helpful , honest , imaginative , independent , intellectual , logical, loving , obedient , polite, responsible and self- controlled. The child rearing practices used by the mothers and fathers were also tested as the independent predictor variables according to the following terms : autonomy , coercion, companionship , guilt , inconsistency, love withdrawal, over protection, physical affection, positive reasoning , and support . A similar questionnaire was also sent to the parents of these students as king the mother and father to rate their student ' s moral character and also how they fee l they raised their son or daughter. The results indicate fathers influence their daughter ' s moral character as much as do mothers. However , using the above moral character variables and child rearing practices variables , fathers only slightly influence their sons and mothers have no significant influence over their sons. Parental child rearing techniques influencing the females the most are : low amounts of physical affection and autonomy from both parents, low amounts of support from the mother , and low amounts of guilt from the father . Also, high amounts of companionship and inconsistency from both parents are strong influences on moral character high ratings. Those child rearing techniques promoting high moral character in males are low amounts of over protection and high amounts of love withdrawal from fathers. It also appears the way children perceive their parents rearing them is in most cases not the way parents feel they raised their children. Also , the way children view their own character traits is not the same way the parents view it in most cases .

In Syrian hamsters, social behavior is mediated exclusively by chemosensory cues and circulating gonadal steroid hormones. Where these two signals are processed in the brain is unknown, but the posterior bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (pBNST) has been suggested as a candidate site. Therefore, we tested male hamsters’ preference for opposite-sex odors following excitotoxic lesions of the pBNST. Lesions of the pBNST (pBNST-X) eliminated male hamsters’ preference for opposite-sex odors. Furthermore, pBNST-X males spent significantly less time investigating female odors than clean odors and significantly less time investigating female odors than control males did. Lesions of the pBNST did not change male hamsters’ investigation of male odors. The deficits observed in pBNST-X males were not due to a failure to discriminate between odors, as pBNST-X males were able to distinguish between odors. Together, these data suggest the pBNST is critical for opposite-sex odor preference in male hamsters.

Grooming relationships between adult male chimpanzees are often reciprocal, i.e. individuals receive grooming from those they groom. Grooming may be reciprocated at the same time it is received (mutual grooming), or later within the same grooming session. Alternatively, it can be reciprocated at a much later stage, in another session. An analysis of individual grooming sessions at the dyadic level was used to investigate how chimpanzees reciprocate grooming within these sessions. This study describes the grooming and reciprocation of grooming by male chimpanzees, living in a multi-male, multi-female group at the Edinburgh Zoo, Scotland. A method for the analysis of dyadic grooming relationships was based on the presence or absence of mutual and unilateral grooming in a session, which allows seven types of grooming session to be distinguished. Grooming session was defined empirically, and the duration of the bout criterion interval (BCl) depended on the presence or absence of oestrous females. For comparison, however, the same BCI was used throughout. Without oestrous females, grooming was primarily reciprocated in sessions with mutual grooming and unilateral grooming by both participants. This kind of session proved highly cooperative and each male adjusted the duration of his unilateral grooming to that of mutual grooming, rather than to the duration of unilateral grooming by the other male. Mutual grooming was less important to dyads which had a strong grooming relationship. It is suggested that mutual grooming serves as an indication of the motivation to groom unilaterally. There was no indication that males reciprocated on the basis of TIT-FOR-TAT within these sessions, or between sessions in general. Alternative hypotheses of mutual grooming were only partly confirmed in that some dyads used mutual grooming to reduce the (already very short) time they spent in grooming. However, mutual grooming did not arise from the accidental overlap in the grooming of two partners. In the presence of oestrous females, grooming cooperation between the males broke down, and this was the result of heightened aggression as well as the presence of oestrous females itself. The balance in grooming given and received shifted in the direction of dominants (i.e. dominants received more) under the influence of oestrous females, but in the opposite direction under the influence of aggression. Feeding had no effect on the reciprocity of groormng. There was considerable dyadic variation. Some dyads groomed more when there were oestrous females, others groomed less. Some dyads had proportionally less mutual grooming with increasing numbers of oestrous females, others had more. There were generally no clear patterns of grooming reciprocation over longer time-spans than the session, but the overall degree of reciprocity of a dyad was frequently reached at the end of each day. Tracing the degree of reciprocation over a few weeks indicated that some dyads' grooming was governed by dominance, whereas that of others by cooperation.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Alabama at Birmingham, 2007. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed Oct. 31, 2007). Includes bibliographical references (p. 79-92).

Diss. (sammanfattning) Stockholm : Karolinska institutet, 2005. / Härtill 4 uppsatser.

Thesis (M.Sc. Biological Sciences)--University of Waikato, 2007. / Title from PDF cover (viewed February 21, 2008) Includes bibliographical references (p. 79-85)

Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury, 2000. / A thesis presented to the University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, December, 2000. Includes bibliographical references.

Diss. (sammanfattning) Stockholm : Karolinska institutet, 2007. / Härtill 4 uppsatser.