Access to this full-text is provided by SAGE Publications Inc.
Content available from Evolutionary Psychology
This content is subject to copyright.
Evolutionary Psychology
www.epjournal.net – 2010. 8(2): 151-169
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Original Article
Zoonotic and Non-Zoonotic Diseases in Relation to Human Personality and
Societal Values: Support for the Parasite-Stress Model
Randy Thornhill, Department of Biology, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA. Email:
rthorn@unm.edu (corresponding author).
Corey L. Fincher, Department of Biology, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Damian R. Murray, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Mark Schaller, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Abstract: The parasite-stress model of human sociality proposes that humans’ ontogenetic
experiences with infectious diseases as well as their evolutionary historical interactions
with these diseases exert causal influences on human psychology and social behavior. This
model has been supported by cross-national relationships between parasite prevalence and
human personality traits, and between parasite prevalence and societal values. Importantly,
the parasite-stress model emphasizes the causal role of non-zoonotic parasites (which have
the capacity for human-to-human transmission), rather than zoonotic parasites (which do
not), but previous studies failed to distinguish between these conceptually distinct cate-
gories. The present investigation directly tested the differential predictive effects of
zoonotic and non-zoonotic (both human-specific and multihost) parasite prevalence on
personality traits and societal values. Supporting the parasite-stress model, cross-national
differences in personality traits (unrestricted sexuality, extraversion, openness to experi-
ences) and in societal values (individualism, collectivism, gender equality, democratiza-
tion) are predicted specifically by non-zoonotic parasite prevalence.
Keywords: collectivism, democracy, gender equality, infectious diseases, sociosexual
orientation, zoonosis.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Introduction
The parasite-stress model of human sociality implies that parasitic diseases (i.e., infec-
tious diseases) are causal, both proximately and ultimately, in shaping major features of
human psychology and behavior. Throughout evolutionary history, human ancestors faced
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 152-
adaptive problems caused by infectious diseases’ negative effects on morbidity, mortality,
and reproductive fitness. This selection history is demonstrated by the many adaptations
that have evolved for defenses against these negative effects. These include mechanisms
that detect and neutralize parasitic infection of the body (i.e., mechanisms that comprise the
classical immune system), and additional mechanisms—the behavioral immune system—
that facilitate behavioral avoidance of parasite transmission in the first place, as well as
mechanisms that function to manage local parasitic infections. The behavioral immune
system, like the classical immune system, manifests conditionally in a predictable set of
affective and cognitive responses to local levels of parasite stress, which have additional
implications for cross-national variation in human behavioral dispositions (i.e., personality
traits) and value systems basic to important features of human social life.
Parasite Prevalence and Worldwide Variation in Human Personality
Many behavioral dispositions have the potential to increase individuals’ exposure to
infectious diseases. However, the fitness costs associated with contacting disease must be
weighed against the potential fitness benefits associated with those behavioral dispositions.
Sexual behavior offers an obvious example. Compared to “restricted” forms of sexual
behavior (e.g., monogamous mating), “unrestricted” sexual behavior is associated with
greater exposure to socially transmitted diseases. But unrestricted sexual behavior can con-
fer reproductive benefits as well (Thornhill and Gangestad, 2008). Consequently, there are
adaptive advantages associated with context-dependent phenotypic plasticity in the domain
of sexual behavior, with a more restricted approach to mating occurring under ecological
conditions in which the threat of parasite transmission is greater, and a more unrestricted
approach occurring when the threat of parasite transmission is reduced. Worldwide data on
human populations support this hypothesis: in countries with a higher prevalence of
infectious diseases, people report a dispositional tendency toward greater sexual restricted-
ness, and these cultures are defined also by more conservative and traditional values, both
sexual and otherwise (Schaller and Murray, 2008; Thornhill, Fincher, and Aran, 2009).
This cross-national positive relationship between prevalence of infectious disease and
sexual restrictiveness is stronger for women than for men.
This same logic applies to other human behavioral tendencies. A dispositional tenden-
cy toward gregariousness with a diversity of people and extraversion is associated with
specific kinds of interpersonal benefits—e.g., larger social networks, including mating
pools—but also implies greater exposure to infectious diseases (Nettle, 2005). To the extent
that there evolved a capacity for contingent plasticity in dispositional tendencies toward
extraversion, it follows that human populations are likely to be characterized by extraver-
sion primarily under ecological conditions of low parasite prevalence, whereas a more
introverted personality style is more likely to emerge when the prevalence of parasites is
high. This prediction has been supported by cross-national data describing the personality
traits of tens of thousands of people in dozens of countries worldwide (Schaller and
Murray, 2008).
Similarly, specific kinds of fitness benefits may accrue to individuals who are curious,
adventurous, and generally “open” to unfamiliar experiences and new ideas. For several
reasons, however, dispositional openness also may be associated with increased risk of
parasite transmission. Individuals who are curious and adventurous may be more likely to
violate rituals and norms (such as those pertaining to hygiene and food preparation; e.g.,
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 153-
Sherman and Billing, 1999) that serve as buffers against contact with local parasites. In
addition, dispositional openness, in ways similar to extraversion, is associated with increas-
ed contact with out-group members and other unfamiliar peoples who may be hosts to
novel parasites to which the immune defenses of one’s self, one’s family, and one’s fellow
group members are not adapted. Host–parasite coevolutionary races are localized on a
geographical scale. Thus, defenses of both the classical and behavioral immune systems are
most suited to local infectious diseases, but not those outside one’s in-group or typical
social milieu (Fincher and Thornhill, 2008; also, Tanaka, Kumm, and Feldman, 2002). In
short, neophobia reduces risk of parasite-based morbidity and mortality, whereas neophilia
increases risk of contracting infectious diseases. To the extent that there is contingent
plasticity in dispositional tendencies toward openness, it follows that human populations
are expected to have higher levels of dispositional openness (neophilia) within ecologies
characterized by low parasite prevalence, and will have lower levels of openness
(neophobia) within ecologies characterized by higher prevalence of parasites. Empirical
evidence across many countries of the world also supports this prediction (Schaller and
Murray, 2008).
Parasite Prevalence and Worldwide Variation in Societal Values
The prevalence of parasites in the local ecology not only has implications for human
personality, but also—perhaps more profoundly—for the cultural value systems and
political ideologies that define human societies.
To the extent that value systems encourage adherence to existing traditions and norms,
and place constraints on individuals’ inclinations to deviate from those norms through
unwillingness to accept new ideas and ways that arise within or outside the group, these
value systems provide a buffer against parasite transmission. To the extent that value
systems encourage xenophobic responses to unfamiliar peoples, these value systems limit
exposure to novel parasites harbored by out-groups (Fincher, Thornhill, Murray, and
Schaller, 2008; Navarrete and Fessler, 2006). To the extent that value systems encourage
philopatry, and impose limits on the dispersal from natal locales, they also limit exposure to
novel parasites (Fincher et al., 2008). The relative benefits of these value systems—as
opposed to value systems encouraging individualism, dispersal, innovation and
xenophilia—would be especially great under ecological conditions in which infectious
parasites are especially prevalent. The implication is that these value systems, and their
manifest behavioral patterns, are likely to be especially common in populations character-
ized by a high prevalence of infectious diseases. This prediction has been supported
empirically across multiple studies, using a variety of empirical indicators of social values.
One study focused specifically on dispersal. Across a large sample of traditional societies
in the ethnographic record, geographic dispersal (measured as home range size) was related
negatively with parasite prevalence (Fincher and Thornhill, 2008). Another study examined
multiple measures of “collectivism” and “individualism.” Collectivistic value systems are
defined, in part, by ethnocentric attitudes, adherence to existing traditions, behavioral con-
formity, and neophobia; individualistic values are defined by higher levels of intergroup
contact, encouragement of innovation, tolerance for idiosyncratic behavior, and neophilia
(Gelfand, Bhawuk, Nishii, and Bechtold, 2004; Triandis, 1995). Across a worldwide
sample of contemporary countries, parasite prevalence was strongly, negatively associated
with two different measures of individualism, and strongly, positively associated with two
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 154-
additional measures of collectivism (Fincher et al., 2008).
These effects generalize to political ideologies and associated political systems as
well. Autocracy, the antipole of democracy, arises, in part, from societal values promoting
widespread obedience to authority, conformity and neophobia. In contrast, democratic
ideologies and political structures are associated with more individualistic value systems
and the specific behaviors associated with them (e.g., greater trust of, altruism toward, and
interaction with out-groups) (Thornhill et al., 2009). According to the parasite-stress model,
variation among contemporary nations’ political structures is therefore expected to corres-
pond to ecological variation in parasite prevalence. Recent evidence indicates that this is
so. In analyses involving most of the world’s countries, parasite prevalence was inversely
correlated with four different measures of democratization (Thornhill et al., 2009).
For similar reasons, parasite prevalence also is expected to predict other forms of
political liberalism. For example, democratization is accompanied by the liberation of
women from the tradition of masculine social control, which manifests in an increase in
women’s civil rights and political representation (Inglehart, 2003; Wejnert, 2005; Welzel,
2007). It follows from the parasite-stress model that this form of liberalism should be more
pronounced within populations that have a relatively low prevalence of parasites. It is.
Across many countries of the world, parasite prevalence correlates negatively with national
indicators of gender equality (Gangestad, Haselton, and Buss, 2006; Thornhill et al., 2009).
Robustness of these Cross-national Relationships
These empirical findings provide provocative and wide-ranging support for the
parasite-stress model of human sociality. Furthermore, additional findings have largely
ruled out alternative explanations for these significant relationships between parasite
prevalence and cross-national differences in personality and values.
For example, previous research has assessed and statistically controlled for a wide
variety of potential confounding variables. These include variables pertaining to economic
development (e.g., gross domestic product per capita, income inequity), climate (e.g., mean
annual temperature), social demographics (e.g., population density), and non-disease-
related threats to human welfare. The predictive effects of parasite prevalence have
persisted even when these variables are controlled, thus rendering many potential
alternative explanations untenable (for details, see Fincher et al., 2008; Fincher and
Thornhill, 2008; Schaller and Murray, 2008; Thornhill et al., 2009).
Additional analyses have addressed the possibility that the magnitude and/or
significance of the cross-national results might be artificially inflated by statistical non-
independence. Although a considerable amount of cross-cultural research indicates that
geopolitical boundaries (i.e., national borders) can serve as useful proxies for cultural
boundaries (e.g., Schwartz, 2004), it can be argued that the personality styles and societal
norms of geographically proximal nations may not be truly independent—that they may be
descriptively similar not merely because of similar ecologies, but also because of shared
cultural histories (e.g., Mace and Pagel, 1994; Nettle, 2009; Rogers and Cashdan, 1997;
Ross and Homer, 1976). One way to test whether there is a predictive relationship between
parasite prevalence and cultural outcomes, and to assure that this relationship is not merely
an artifact of statistical non-independence, is to compute parasite-prevalence, personality
traits, and societal value scores for larger culturally-distinct world regions (e.g., the six
world cultural regions identified by Murdock, 1949), and to treat those cultural regions
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 155-
(rather than nations) as the unit of statistical analysis. Fincher et al. (2008) reported exactly
such analyses, and found that parasite prevalence still predicted cultural differences in
individualism and collectivism. Although not previously reported, analogous analyses have
been done on the other trait and value variables too, and in all cases these world-region
analyses have produced results replicating the nation-level effects. For example, in analyses
treating Murdock’s six world regions as the unit of analysis, the mean historical prevalence
of parasites within a region (computed from nation-level scores reported by Murray and
Schaller, 2010) strongly predicts mean contemporary levels of extraversion, openness, and
democratization (rs exceed -0.75 in magnitude, ps < 0.05, one-tailed). These results are
inconsistent with any alternative explanation based on statistical non-independence of
nation-level data.
The implication is that national differences in personality and values are predicted by
parasite prevalence, and that these relations cannot easily be attributed to alternative causal
explanations. Nevertheless, some additional conceptual and empirical limitations remain
unaddressed by previous research.
Zoonotic Versus Non-Zoonotic Diseases as Differential Predictors of Human Variation
One limitation results from the fact that these previous investigations employed
relatively crude measures of pathogen prevalence. One measure (employed by Fincher et
al., 2008, and Schaller and Murray, 2008) estimated overall parasite prevalence (number of
cases of disease) on the basis of data pertaining to a diverse set of nine human infectious
diseases represented in epidemiological atlases that refer back to the early 1900s. A second
measure (employed by Fincher et al., 2008, and Thornhill et al., 2009) estimated overall
parasite prevalence (number of cases) on the basis of data pertaining to a diverse set of 22
human infectious diseases, obtained in 2007 from an online database of contemporary
human infectious diseases (GIDEON, see below). Statistical analyses attest to the reliability
and validity of these measures (e.g., Fincher et al., 2008; Murray and Schaller, 2010;
Thornhill et al., 2009), but these measures are only indicators of overall parasite
prevalence. These measures fail to discriminate between conceptually distinct categories of
parasites defined by different modes of transmission.
Parasitologists and epidemiologists classify human diseases into three distinct cate-
gories based on their modes of transmission: zoonotic, multihost, and human-specific
(Smith, Sax, Gaines, Guenier, and Guégan, 2007). Zoonotic parasites develop and
reproduce entirely in non-human hosts (e.g., livestock, wildlife) and can infect humans as
well, but are not transmitted directly from human to human. Multihost parasites can use
both non-human and human hosts to complete their life cycle, and may be transmitted
directly from human to human as well as through inter-species transmission. Human-
specific parasites are transmitted only from human to human (although ancestrally they
often have had a zoonotic transmission origin; see Pearce-Duvet, 2006).
These categorical distinctions matter in the present theoretical context. The cross-
national differences discussed above—differences in personality traits and societal
values—are predicted by a parasite-stress model of human sociality that emphasizes
especially the potential infection risks associated with interactions with conspecifics. The
risks associated with unrestricted sociosexuality and extraversion, for instance, refer
specifically to the risk of human-to-human transmission. The infection risks associated with
openness are not quite so specific, but many of the specific forms of behavior associated
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 156-
with openness (e.g., increased contact with out-group members) do imply a higher risk of
human-to-human transmission. The same logic applies to the societal value dimensions of
individualism and collectivism (given that collectivism is defined, in part, by ethnocentrism
and philopatry) as well as to democratization and liberalism in general (given that socially
and politically liberal attitudes are also defined, in part, by a greater tolerance for, liking of,
and contact with unfamiliar peoples).
The implication is clear. According to the parasite-stress model of human sociality,
worldwide differences in the domains of human personality and societal values are unlikely
to correlate with the presence of zoonotic parasites (which cannot be transmitted from
human to human), but should correlate strongly with the presence of non-zoonotic parasites
(which have the capacity for human-to-human transmission). Empirical evidence consistent
with this prediction would provide unique and novel support for the parasite-stress model
of human sociality.
Materials and Methods
The unit of analysis used throughout the current investigation is that of a geopolitical
region. In most cases, these regions are nations. In some cases, these regions are geograph-
ically separate colonies or territories (e.g., Guam), or culturally distinct regions within a
country (e.g., Hong Kong). For the sake of expository efficiency, the term “country” will
hereafter refer to all units of analysis.
Given that previous results (described above) have shown already that parasite
prevalence predicts cultural outcomes regardless of whether country or broader cultural
region is treated as the unit of analysis, we do not report cultural-region-level analyses here.
Furthermore, our objective is to test whether these previously documented effects are
differentially predicted from the prevalence of zoonotic versus non-zoonotic parasites. This
objective requires analyses with sufficient statistical power to test for differential effects.
Nation-level analyses satisfy this requirement; world-region-level analyses do not.
Three Indices of Parasite Richness: Zoonotic, Multihost, Human-Specific
For each of 227 countries, we computed three indices of parasite richness, based on
the presence or absence of every human infectious disease cataloged in the GIDEON data-
base. GIDEON is a frequently updated, subscription-based online database of human
infectious diseases available to the medical community and researchers. GIDEON data
have been used extensively in prior research on the global distribution of infectious dis-
eases (e.g., Guernier, Hochberg, and Guegan, 2004; Smith et al., 2007; Thornhill et al.,
2009). Our indices were generated from data obtained from GIDEON in 2008.
We classified each human infectious disease as either zoonotic, multihost, or human-
specific, according to Smith et al.’s (2007) classification scheme, with updates based on
more recent epidemiological information in GIDEON and in other sources. These updates
are as follows. Ten new diseases have been added to the GIDEON database since Smith et
al. was published. Thirty-five diseases have changed names since Smith et al.’s paper. Four
diseases were reclassified by us, because of error by Smith et al. and/or recent information
about transmission provided by GIDEON or other sources. Data on the number of each of
the three disease types per country are available from the corresponding author upon
request. This classification has 154 diseases as zoonotic (e.g., rabies, plague, hantavirus),
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 157-
40 diseases as multihost (e.g., leishmaniasis, Chagas disease, Dengue fever), and 117
diseases as human-specific (e.g., measles, cholera, filariasis). For each country, we com-
puted separately the sums of all zoonotic diseases, multihost diseases, and human-specific
diseases that GIDEON listed as having a presence within that country. These three sums
represented three distinct indices of parasite richness. Across all countries, the mean
parasite richness scores were as follows: zoonotic: M ± SD = 53.92 ± 10.40 (range = 38–
87); multihost: M ± SD = 23.59 ± 2.81 (range = 20–32); human-specific: M ± SD = 102.33
± 2.96 (range = 98–110).
These parasite indices do not distinguish between certain aspects of disease trans-
mission—e.g., vector-borne vs. those that require direct contact—nor need they. Whether a
disease transmitted between people is carried through the air by way of a mosquito or by
expelled mucus droplets is not relevant to our main hypothesis about differences between
nonzoonotic and zoonotic influences. Similarly, the taxon of the disease—e.g., fungi, viral,
helminth, etc.—is not relevant to this hypothesis.
We should note that these measures of parasite richness are only indirect measures of
the severity of stress that parasites impose on human populations. Nevertheless, there is
abundant evidence that parasite richness covaries substantially with parasite severity
(Fincher et al., 2009; Fincher and Thornhill, 2008); consequently, these measures of
parasite richness can be used to test hypotheses derived from the parasite-stress model of
human sociality.
Measures of Human Personality Traits
Female Sociosexual Orientation. The Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI;
Simpson and Gangestad, 1991) is a self-report instrument commonly used to assess a
behavioral disposition toward unrestricted sexuality (e.g., willingness to engage in sexual
relations in the absence of a long-term commitment). Based on data collected from 14,059
adults worldwide, Schmitt (2005) reported sex-specific mean SOI scores for nearly 50
countries. Using this data, Schaller and Murray (2008) found that parasite prevalence
predicted both male and female mean SOI scores, although only the relation with female
SOI scores remained statistically significant after controlling for additional variables (also
see similar results in Thornhill et al., 2009). Consequently, our analyses here focus
exclusively on mean female SOI (high SOI scores indicate a more unrestricted approach to
sexual behavior).
Extraversion. The NEO-PI-R questionnaire is the most widely employed and well-
validated instrument available for assessing the five fundamental trait dimensions that
account for most of the variability in human personality (see McCrae, 2002). Extraversion
is one of these dimensions. Two different investigations have employed the NEO-PI-R
questionnaire to assess and describe worldwide differences in extraversion. McCrae (2002)
summarized results from several dozen independent investigations that used the NEO-PI-R
questionnaire to assess the self-reported personality traits in about 30 different countries.
Separately, McCrae et al. (2005) used the NEO-PI-R questionnaire and an observer-report
methodology to assess the personality traits of 11,985 individuals living in about 50
different countries. Both investigations produced average extraversion scores for each
country included in their analyses. Schaller and Murray (2008) found that parasite
prevalence significantly and negatively predicted both measures of extraversion.
Openness to Experience. Openness to experience is also one of the five fundamental
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 158-
trait dimensions assessed by the NEO-PI-R questionnaire. McCrae (2002) and McCrae et
al. (2005) reported mean openness scores for each country included in their analyses.
Schaller and Murray (2008) found that parasite prevalence significantly and negatively
predicted measures of openness from both studies.
Measures of Societal Values
Individualistic and Collectivistic Values. The values unidimension of
individualism/collectivism has been a major research focus in cross-cultural psychology, as
it is widely felt to describe important cultural differences across countries of the world
(e.g., Gelfand et al., 2004). Fincher et al. (2008) reported significant correlations between
parasite prevalence and four different numerical indicators of the extent to which a country
is characterized by collectivistic or individualistic values. Two different (but highly
overlapping) measures of individualism were taken from Hofstede (2001) and Suh, Diener,
Oishi, and Triandis (1998); two different (but highly overlapping) measures of collectivism
were taken from Gelfand et al. (2004) and Kashima and Kashima (1998). (A complete
description of these measures can be found in Fincher et al., 2008.) As an additional
indicator of collectivistic values, we conducted analyses on the strength of “family ties”
within each country—measured as a numerical composite variable of multiple self-report
items included in the World Values Survey. Allegiance to extended family is a defining
feature of collectivistic value systems (Alesina and Giuliano, 2007; Gelfand et al., 2004),
and the family ties variable correlates very highly with other measures of individual-
ism/collectivism (for evidence and further discussion, see Thornhill et al., 2009). See Table
2 for sample sizes (number of countries) associated with the five value systems of
individualism/collectivism.
Democratization. Thornhill et al. (2009) reported significant correlations between
pathogen prevalence and four measures commonly employed by scholars to describe the
nature of political systems across the globe. Two measures were developed by Vanhanen
(2003) on the basis of quantifiable data. One is Vanhanen’s Index of Democracy, which
reflects the extent to which people in a country participate in elections, as well as the extent
to which there exists opportunities allowing competition for political power and opposition
to heads of states. Vanhanen’s other measure, the Resource Distribution index, assesses the
mean level to which five valuable resources (e.g., money, property ownership, educational
opportunities) are distributed widely and equitably across the people in the country.
Vanhanen’s two indices are highly positively correlated. Both indices are scored such that
higher values reflect higher levels of democratization within a country. Two additional
measures of democratization assess the extent to which people of a country have various
political rights and civil liberties, and are based on subjective judgments of political
scientists, legal scholars and other experts. The Human Freedom Index, obtained from the
World Christian Encyclopedia (Barrett, Kurian, and Johnson, 2001), offers a composite
score of several variables related to political rights and civil liberties. Higher scores
correspond to greater levels of individual freedom. The organization Freedom House
(www.freedomhouse.org) provides two ratings reflecting restrictions on individual
freedoms—one rating assessing restrictions on political rights, and another rating assessing
restrictions on civil liberties (see Karatnycky, 1998 for a discussion of rating methods). The
two Freedom House ratings are highly correlated (r = 0.94). Higher ratings correspond to
higher restrictions. Therefore, for our analyses, we summed the Freedom House ratings into
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 159-
a single index reflecting restrictions on democratization rights.
We also included a fifth measure of democratization not presented in prior analyses.
The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU; www.eiu.com) computed a cross-national
Democracy Index based on 60 indicators assessing five defining components of democrat-
ization (electoral process and political pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of the
government, political participation, and political culture). We employed the EIU
Democracy Index for 2008; higher scores reflect higher levels of democratization. See
Table 3 for sample sizes associated with the democratization variables.
Gender Equality. An index of gender equality for 93 countries is provided by the
Gender Empowerment Measure, reported in the United Nations Human Development
Report (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/280) in 2007. This index provides a composite
measure of gender equality in political and economic participation, and in power over
economic resources. High scores indicate higher levels of gender equality within a country.
Thornhill et al. (2009) found that this measure of gender equality correlated positively with
democratization and correlated negatively with both collectivism and parasite prevalence
(also see Gangestad et al., 2006).
Results
For each outcome variable, we computed correlations (Pearson rs) with each of the
three parasite-richness indices (zoonotics and each of the two non-zoonotic indices). In
addition, because the three indices of parasite richness were positively intercorrelated (rs
ranged from 0.56 to 0.66), we conducted additional regression analyses to more rigorously
assess the unique predictive effects associated with each index.
Correlations Between Parasite Richness Indices and Personality Traits
Female Sociosexual Orientation. Across 45 countries, female SOI was correlated
negatively with indices of both human-specific parasite richness (r = -0.38, p = 0.01) and
multihost parasite richness (r = -0.47, p < 0.001). The relation with zoonotic parasite
richness was negligible and non-significant (r = -0.12, p = 0.44). When all three parasite-
richness indices were entered simultaneously as predictors of female SOI in a follow-up
regression analysis, only the multihost index remained a statistically significant predictor (p
= 0.02).
Extraversion. Table 1 reports correlations between each parasite richness index and
the two measures of extraversion. A clear pattern is evident: extraversion was predicted
most strongly by human-specific parasite richness, somewhat less strongly by multihost
parasite richness, and least strongly by zoonotic parasite richness. In follow-up regression
analyses that included all three parasite-richness indices as simultaneous predictors of each
extraversion measure, only the human-specific indices remained a statistically significant
predictor (for the McCrae, 2002, and McCrae et al., 2005 measures of extraversion, ps =
0.02 and 0.001, respectively). There were negligible unique effects associated with the
other two indices (ps > 0.18).
Openness to Experience. A similar pattern emerged in the correlations between the
parasite-richness indices and the two measures of openness, although the correlations
involving the human-specific and multihost indices were not substantially different in
magnitude (see Table 1). In follow-up regression analyses that included all three parasite-
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 160-
richness indices as simultaneous predictors of each openness measure, none of the three
indices was a significant predictor (all ps > 0.20). Given the uninformative results of these
regression analyses, an additional set of regression analyses was created in which the
human-specific and multihost parasite-richness indices were summed to create a broader
index of non-zoonotic parasite richness; this non-zoonotic index was entered along with the
zoonotic index as predictors of openness. The results revealed that the non-zoonotic index
was a significant predictor of the McCrae et al. (2005) openness measure (p = 0.03) and a
near-significant predictor of the McCrae (2002) openness measure (p = 0.10). In contrast,
zoonotic parasite richness exerted no predictive effect whatsoever (beta’s = 0.00 and 0.04,
ps > 0.85).
Table 1. Correlations (Pearson rs, accompanied by p-values) between each index of
parasite richness and each measure of extraversion and openness to experience (N = the
number of countries in each analysis).
Index of Parasite Richness
Human p Multihost p Zoonotic p N
Extraversion
(McCrae, 2002)
-0.58 0.001 -0.49 0.006 -0.28 > 0.10 30
Extraversion
(McCrae et al., 2005) -0.54 < 0.001
-0.34
0.02 -0.31 0.03 48
Openness
(McCrae, 2002) -0.43 0.02
-0.35
0.06 -0.29 > 0.10 30
Openness
(McCrae et al., 2005)
-0.31
0.03 -0.28 0.06 -0.11 > 0.10 48
Relations Between Parasite Richness Indices and Societal Values
Individualism and Collectivism. Each of the two individualism measures correlated
substantially negatively with both human-specific and multihost parasite richness; in
contrast, they correlated only weakly with zoonotic parasite richness (see Table 2).
Analogously, each of the two collectivism measures, as well as the measure of family ties,
showed moderate to strong positive correlations with both human-specific and multihost
parasite richness, and weaker correlations with zoonotic parasite richness. Follow-up
regression analyses included all three parasite richness indices as predictors. The results
revealed that the predictive effects associated with human-specific parasite richness
remained significant on two of the five outcome measures (the Suh et al. individualism
measure, and the family ties measure; both ps < 0.001), and marginally significant on two
other measures (the Hofstede individual measure, and the Gelfand collectivism measure; ps
= 0.09 and 0.12, respectively). The predictive effects of multihost parasite richness
remained significant on three of the five outcomes measures (both individualism measures,
as well as the Kashima and Kashima pronoun-drop measure of collectivism; all ps < 0.001)
and marginally significant on one additional measure (the Gelfand collectivism measure; p
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 161-
= 0.10). In contrast, the modest relations with zoonotic parasite richness actually reversed
in sign when controlling for shared variance with the other parasite-richness measures. For
the two individualism measures, the reversal in sign actually resulted in significant positive
relations with zoonotic parasite richness (both ps < 0.002), in direct contrast with the
significant negative relations with human-specific and multihost parasite richness.
Additional regression analyses that included the zoonotic index and the non-zoonotic
composite index as predictors revealed a clear distinction: non-zoonotic parasite richness
was a unique negative predictor of individualism (both ps < 0.001), and a unique positive
predictor of collectivism and family ties (all three ps < 0.001); zoonotic parasite richness
had no consistent unique effect, and any effect at all (on the two individualism measures)
was exactly opposite to that indicated by the correlations in Table 2.
Table 2. Correlations (Pearson rs, accompanied by p-values) between each index of
parasite richness and each measure of individualism/collectivism (N = the number of
countries in each analysis).
Index of Parasite Richness
Human p Multihost p Zoonotic p N
Individualism
(Hofstede, 2001) -0.60 < 0.001 -0.70 < 0.001 -0.17 > 0.10 67
Individualism
(Suh et al., 1998) -0.58 < 0.001 -0.61 < 0.001 -0.20 > 0.10 57
Collectivism
(Gelfand et al., 2004) 0.51 < 0.001 0.51 < 0.001 0.27 0.04 57
Collectivism
(Pronoun-drop; Kashima
and Kashima, 1998) 0.35 0.003 0.45 < 0.001 0.19 > 0.10 70
Family Ties
(World Values Survey) 0.58 < 0.001 0.50 < 0.001 0.26 0.02 78
Democratization. Across all five democratization measures, there emerged a clear
pattern in the relative magnitude of correlations (see Table 3). Human-specific parasite
richness had the strongest correlations, followed by multihost parasite richness; all these
correlations were statistically significant. In contrast, zoonotic parasite richness had
relatively weaker relations with democratization measures. In follow-up regression
analyses, with all three parasite richness indices entered simultaneously as predictors,
human-specific parasite richness remained a robust and statistically significant predictor of
all five outcome measures (all ps < 0.001). These regression analyses revealed a unique
effect of multihost parasite richness on one of the five democratization measures
(Vanhanen’s resource distribution measure; p = 0.05). These same analyses revealed that
any apparent effect of zoonotic parasite richness disappeared entirely or, if anything,
reversed in sign. Zoonotic parasite richness was significantly positively, rather than
negatively, correlated with the EIU democracy index, and with both of Vanhanen’s indices,
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 162-
when controlling for shared variance with the other parasite richness indices; ps < 0.005.
Table 3. Correlations (Pearson rs, accompanied by p-values) between each index of
parasite richness and each measure of democratization (N = the number of countries in each
analysis).
Index of Parasite Richness
Human p Multihost p Zoonotic p N
Democracy Index
(EIU, 2008)
-0.48 < 0.001 -0.26 0.001 -0.02 > 0.10 163
Index of Democracy
(Vanhanen, 2003) -0.55 < 0.001 -0.30 < 0.001 -0.02 > 0.10 168
Resource Distribution
(Vanhanen, 2003) -0.70 < 0.001 -0.43 < 0.001 -0.08 > 0.10 168
Human Freedom Index
(Barrett et al., 2001) -0.51 < 0.001 -0.41 < 0.001 -0.39 < 0.001 214
Restrictions on Rights†
(Freedom House, 2007) 0.43 < 0.001 0.32 < 0.001 0.22 0.002 190
† Freedom House measure is scored such that higher scores represent greater restriction on civil liberties and
political rights.
Gender Equality. Across 93 countries, gender equality was correlated negatively with
indices of both human-specific parasite richness (r = -0.52, p < 0.001) and multihost
parasite richness (r = -0.35 p < 0.001). The relation with zoonotic parasite richness was
negligible and non-significant (r = -0.09, p = 0.37). In a follow-up regression analysis with
all three parasite richness indices simultaneously entered as predictors of gender equality,
only the human-specific index remained a statistically significant predictor (p < 0.001).
Ancillary Analyses: Zoonotics, Non-Zoonotics and Livestock. The preceding analyses
suggest that relations linking parasite prevalence to human personality and societal values
(documented in previous publications) are attributable primarily to the prevalence of non-
zoonotic parasites (human-specific and multihost parasites). Compared to the effects of
non-zoonotic parasite richness, any effects associated with zoonotic parasite richness were
negligible.
Before conclusively ruling out the contribution of zoonotic parasites to these world-
wide differences in personality and values, it is important to consider an alternative explan-
ation, based on differential measurement error. It is possible that epidemiologists and health
agencies are especially attentive to diseases that are transmitted from human to human,
whereas the presence of zoonotic parasites may be relatively poorly recorded. If so, then
simply for reasons of differential measurement error, zoonotic parasite richness would be
expected to correlate less strongly than non-zoonotics with any outcome variable.
The plausibility of this alternative explanation is undermined by evidence that many
zoonotic diseases are monitored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 163-
other relevant agencies worldwide, as zoonotics are thought to be an important source of
emerging human infectious diseases (e.g., bird flu; Greger, 2007; Jones et al., 2008). Some
zoonotics, however, may escape surveillance by these agencies (e.g., Maudlin, Eisler and
Welburn, 2009). One way to address this alternative explanation empirically is to show that
the zoonotic parasite-richness index is measured with sufficient fidelity to predict addition-
al outcome variables to which it is conceptually related—such as the presence of livestock
within a country. Many zoonotic diseases are contracted from livestock, and so we should
observe an especially strong relationship between livestock and zoonotic parasite
richness—but only if the index of zoonotic parasite richness is measured with a high degree
of validity and reliability.
For 205 countries, we computed the total number of avian and mammalian livestock
over the period from 2000 to 2004 (data obtained from the Global Livestock Atlas of the
World Agricultural Information Center; http://www.fao.org/index_en.htm). To correct for
skew and kurtosis, this value was log-transformed prior to analyses. Correlations with the
three parasite richness indices were as follows: human-specific, r = 0.31; multihost, r =
0.44; zoonotic, r = 0.78 (all ps < 0.001). In a follow-up regression analysis with all three
parasite-richness indices simultaneously entered as predictors, only zoonotic parasite rich-
ness remained significantly, positively related to the total number of livestock (p < 0.001).
These results reveal that the zoonotic parasite-richness index is measured with suffi-
cient accuracy to be a uniquely powerful predictor in domains of conceptual relevance.
Differential measurement error, therefore, is unlikely to account for the fact that non-
zoonotic parasite richness predicted cross-national variability in human personality and
societal values to a much greater extent than did zoonotic disease richness. The data for
each of the analyses in this article are available upon request from the corresponding
author.
Discussion
Although there is a substantial body of evidence linking the prevalence of human
infectious diseases to human social behavior, prior investigations have been limited by the
fact that (a) previous indices of human parasite prevalence represented only a small fraction
of the hundreds of infectious diseases that affect human health, and (b) these indices failed
to distinguish between different disease categories defined by the mode of transmission. To
address these limitations, in this study we employed data bearing on more than 300 differ-
ent human infectious diseases, we computed separate indices assessing the prevalence of
three functionally distinct categories of these diseases (human-specific, multihost,
zoonotic), and we examined the extent to which each index uniquely predicted cross-
national differences in personality traits and societal values. The results were striking.
Both human-specific and multihost parasite richness predicted uniquely cross-national
differences in personality traits and social values. Zoonotic parasite richness contributed
little, if at all, to previously documented cross-national relationships between parasite
prevalence and sociality. Thus, to the extent that worldwide variation in sociality is
predicted by parasite prevalence, this variation appears to be attributable almost entirely to
the prevalence of non-zoonotic diseases.
Several cross-national differences were especially strongly predicted by human-
specific parasite richness. For example, only human-specific parasite richness (but not
multihost parasite richness) uniquely predicted differences in extraversion. This highly
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 164-
specific effect fits the functional logic that informs the parasite-stress model of sociality,
given that extraversion is defined by behavioral interactions with other humans, but has
little bearing on the broader range of behaviors that may expose individuals to inter-species
pathogen transmission. Cross-national differences in democratization and gender equality
also were more strongly predicted by human-specific rather than multihost parasite rich-
ness. This effect may reflect the fact that one fundamental consequence of democratic,
egalitarian ideologies is increased proximity to and behavioral contact between a wider
range of peoples.
In contrast, human-specific and multihost parasite richness were approximately equal-
ly predictive of openness to experience, and of individualistic/collectivistic values. These
findings also conform to the functional logic of the parasite-stress model, as both openness
and individualism/collectivism have consequences for a broad range of behaviors, includ-
ing behaviors with implications for interpersonal contact (e.g., approach versus avoidance
of unfamiliar peoples), as well as behaviors with implications for inter-species transmission
of pathogens (e.g., violation versus conformity to cultural norms pertaining to hygiene).
Intriguingly, there was also one cross-national difference that was predicted especially
strongly by multihost (compared to human-specific) parasite richness: female sociosexual
orientation. This is the only finding observed here that is not immediately interpretable
within our functional framework.
More generally, interpretation of the sociosexuality findings is complicated by a com-
plex set of causal relations involving social value systems, sexual behavior, and parasite
transmission. We have seen that as prevalence of non-zoonotic diseases declines, there is
greater liberalization of social attitudes and values in general, and of sexual attitudes in
particular. In turn, sexual liberalization facilitates transmission of sexually transmitted para-
sites, and is correlated positively with the prevalence, diversity and virulence of sexually
transmitted parasites (Barber, 2008; Celentano, Sifakis, Go, and Davis, 2008; Ewald,
1994). One implication of our results is that female sexual liberalization accompanies a
reduction in non-zoonotic (especially multihost) diseases, in spite of the fact that this sexual
liberalization produces an increase in the threat posed specifically by sexually transmitted
diseases. In order to more completely untangle this complicated set of causal relations, it
may be necessary to develop even more nuanced parasite-stress measures (e.g., country-
level measures specific to sexually transmitted parasites that assess temporal changes in
prevalence, variety and virulence).
In contrast to the effects of non-zoonotic disease richness, we found that (when
controlling for shared variance with non-zoonotic disease richness) zoonotic disease
richness actually related positively with several democracy measures. The direction of this
relation is in the direction opposite that expected if zoonosis causes human social
psychology and behavior. We can only speculate as to the reason for this positive relation.
One possibility is that this relation may reflect the broader trade policies and associated
openness to agricultural importation in democratic countries compared to autocratic
countries.
The dependent variables that we used span several prior decades. Value systems and
parasite stress tend to be regionally stable in general (Fincher et al., 2008; Murray and
Schaller, 2010; Thornhill et al., 2009). In large part, the stability of parasite stress is stable
because of parasites’ adaptation to ecological factors such as temperature and rainfall
(Guernier et al., 2004). When parasite stress declines dramatically as a result of increased
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 165-
hygienic and medical infrastructure and technology in a region, there is evidence that
values also show the changes predicted by the parasite-stress theory of sociality (see below
on the social revolution in the West). Also, our research shows that the contemporary
parasite measures we used have the same patterns of covariation across dependent
variables, regardless of when the dependent variables were tabulated by prior researchers.
Most broadly, our results have many implications for future research exploring rela-
tions between infectious diseases and human sociality. For instance, in addition to investi-
gations that have tested the parasite-stress model of sociality on cross-national data, there
are additional studies that have identified correlates of parasite stress across small-scale
societies (Low, 1990; Quinlan, 2007). The results of these studies are—like previous cross-
national inquiries—limited by the fact that parasite-stress measures did not distinguish be-
tween functionally distinct categories of disease (e.g., human-specific, multihost, zoonotic).
Therefore, just as our analytic methods allowed a more nuanced interpretation of cross-
national results, interpretation of the small-scale society results also is likely to benefit from
a similar analytic approach. As well, an important, broad implication of our findings is that
investigations into the interactions between parasites and sociality in organisms outside of
humans will benefit from considering the distinction between infectious agents that are
transmitted between conspecifics versus those that are not.
There are additional implications for processes operating at other levels. It has been
argued that ontogenetic infection experiences or lack thereof may be proximate causes that
track individuals into collectivism or individualism, respectively, and that other cues of
local contagion risk during ontogeny also may be proximate causes (Fincher et al., 2008;
Thornhill et al., 2009). Cross-national consequences of parasite prevalence may result from
even more subtle ontogenetic processes operating on individuals. For instance, research on
non-human mammals reveals that maternal exposure to parasites has effects on offspring
social behavior (e.g., Curno, Behnke, McElligott, Reader, and Barnard, 2008), implying
epigenetic consequences on individuals’ social development. Given our results, one might
speculate that these effects are more pronounced under conditions of maternal exposure to
non-zoonotic, rather than zoonotic, pathogens. A separate line of research on human cogni-
tion reveals that the perceived threat posed by infectious diseases has consequences for
prejudicial attitudes and other forms of social cognition (e.g., when the threat of disease is
more salient, people express more xenophobic attitudes and less extraverted behavioral
inclinations; Faulkner, Schaller, Park, and Duncan, 2004; Mortensen, Becker, Ackerman,
Neuberg, and Kenrick, in press). These effects also may be specific to the perceived threat
of non-zoonotic, rather than zoonotic, diseases.
There are also implications for predicting effects of public health policy on societal
change. Thornhill et al. (2009) noted that the predictions of the parasite-stress model are
consistent with the marked increase in the liberalization of social values that began to occur
in the West in the 1960s and 1970s (e.g., civil rights, women’s rights, gay and lesbian
rights, anti-authoritarianism, etc.). In the West, but not outside of it, infectious-disease
prevalence was reduced dramatically a generation or two earlier as a result of widespread
availability of antibiotics, child vaccination programs, food- and water-safety practices,
increased sanitation and vector control (see Thornhill et al., 2009 for documentation).
Notably, these public health programs were especially successful in combating non-zoo-
notic rather than zoonotic diseases. This observation, buttressed by the results reported
here, suggests that public health initiatives are most likely to have additional consequences
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 166-
for societies (e.g., promotion of civil liberties and egalitarian value systems) to the extent
that those initiatives are effective in reducing the prevalence of non-zoonotic, rather than
zoonotic, diseases.
Our proximate model for how humans get their value system and personality is based
on condition-dependent psychology. This implies the presence of both low and high
infectious-disease stress in the deep-time past generations of humans. Hence, we are not
saying that humans are primarily individualistic, nor are they basically collectivistic.
Fundamentally, they are both, and which track is taken depends on ontogenetic experiences
pertaining to parasite stress in the local ecological setting. The conditionality is not negated
by evidence of genetic differences in value systems across countries (Chiao and Blizinsky,
2010). The literature on alternative reproductive tactics in animals reveals that adaptive
conditionality, i.e., adaptive phenotypic plasticity, typically is a part of genetically distinct
adaptations across populations and species (Oliveira et al., 2008).
Conclusion
The parasite-stress model of human sociality provides an evolutionarily informed
explanation of why specific human populations inhabiting different parts of the planet
(northern Europe versus southern Europe, for instance) are often described by different
traits, different values, and different cultural norms. More strikingly perhaps, it also helps
explain why some populations inhabiting different parts of the planet (e.g., equatorial South
America and southeast Asia) actually have many cultural traits in common. Thus, in
addition to prototypically cultural processes that are sometimes used to explain common-
alities among nations (e.g., cultural transmission processes), our research implies that many
important cultural commonalities—just like many cultural differences—are attributable
partially to evolved processes through which universal psychological tendencies are evoked
in response to features in the natural ecology (Gangestad et al., 2006). Further, this work
suggests that, among those ecological features, the prevalence of disease-causing parasites
exerts a particularly important influence on human psychology and culture. And finally, as
we show here, the parasites that seem to have mattered most to cultural outcomes are not
the zoonotic diseases. Rather, as predicted by the parasite-stress model of human sociality,
the parasites that have mattered most are those with non-zoonotic modes of transmission.
Acknowledgements: We thank Devaraj Aran, Brian Malott, Brandon Rice, Pooneh Soltani
and Mary Walker for their assistance with the data collection and processing. Anne Rice’s
help with the preparation of the manuscript is gratefully acknowledged. The paper bene-
fitted from the scholarly comments of anonymous referees. The use of archival data from
public sources is exempt from Human Subjects Review.
Received 14 December 2009; Revision submitted 17 March 2010; Accepted 19 March
2010
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 167-
References
Alesina, A., and Giuliano, P. (2007). The power of the family. Discussion paper No. 2132.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Institute of Economic Research, Harvard University.
Barber, N. (2008). Cross-national variation in the motivation for uncommitted sex: the role
of disease and social risks. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 234-245.
Barrett, D. B., Kurian, G. T., and Johnson, T. M. (2001). World Christian encyclopedia: a
comparative survey of churches and religions in the modern world. The world by
countries: religionists, churches, ministries, vol. 1, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Celentano, D. D., Sifakis, F., Go, V., and Davis, W. (2008). Changing sexual mores and
disease transmission. In K. H. Mayer and H. F. Pizer (Eds.), The social ecology of
infectious disease (pp. 50-75). New York, NY: Elsevier.
Chiao, J. Y., and Blizinsky, K. D. (2010). Culture–gene coevolution of individualism–
collectivism and the serotonin transporter gene. Proceedings of the Royal Society B
277, 529-537.
Curno, O., Behnke, J. M., McElligott, A. G., Reader, T., and Barnard, C. J. (2009). Mothers
produce less aggressive sons with altered immunity when there is a threat of disease
during pregnancy. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 276, 1047-1054.
Ewald, P.W. (1994). Evolution of infectious disease. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Faulkner, J., Schaller, M., Park, J. H., and Duncan, L. A. (2004). Evolved disease-avoid-
ance mechanisms and contemporary xenophobic attitudes. Group Processes and
Intergroup Relations, 7, 333-353.
Fincher, C.L., and Thornhill, R. (2008). Assortative sociality, limited dispersal, infectious
disease and the genesis of the global pattern of religion diversity. Proceedings of the
Royal Society B, 275, 2587-2594.
Fincher, C.L., Thornhill, R., Murray, D. R., and Schaller, M. (2008). Pathogen prevalence
predicts human cross-cultural variability in individualism/collectivism. Proceedings
of the Royal Society B, 275, 1279-85.
Gangestad, S. W., Haselton, M. G., and Buss, D. M. (2006). Evolutionary foundations of
cultural variation: evoked culture and mate preferences. Psychological Inquiry, 17,
75-95.
Gelfand, M.J., Bhawuk, D. P. S., Nishii, L. H., and Bechtold, D. J. (2004). Individualism
and collectivism. In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P.W. Dorfman, and V.
Gupta (Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations: the GLOBE study of 62
societies (pp. 437-512). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Greger, M. (2007). The human/animal interface: emergence and resurgence of zoonotic
infectious diseases. Critical Review of Microbiology, 33, 243-299.
Guernier, V., Hochberg, M.E., and Guegan, J. (2004). Ecology drives the worldwide
distribution of human diseases. PLoS Biology, 2, 740-746.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions,
and organizations across nations, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Inglehart, R. (Ed.) (2003). Human values and social change: findings from the values
surveys. Boston, MA: Brill.
Jones, K.E., Patel, N. G., Levy, M. A., Storeygard, A., Balk, D., Gittleman, J. L., and
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 168-
Daszak, P. (2008). Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature, 451, 990-
993.
Karatnycky, A. (Ed.) (1998). Freedom in the world: the annual survey of political rights
and civil liberties, 1997–1998. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Kashima, E.S., and Kashima, Y. (1998). Culture and language: the case of cultural
dimensions and personal pronoun use. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 29,
461-486.
Low, B. S. (1990). Marriage systems and pathogen stress in human societies. American
Zoology, 30, 325-339.
Mace, R., and Pagel, M. (1994). The comparative method in anthropology. Current Anthro-
pology, 35, 549-564.
Maudlin, I., Eisler, M. C., and Welburn, S. C. (2009). Neglected and endemic zoonoses.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 364, 2777-2787.
McCrae, R. R. (2002). NEO-PI-R data from 36 cultures: further intercultural comparisons.
In R. R. McCrae and J. Allik (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across
cultures (pp. 105-126). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., and 78 members of the Personality Profiles of Cultures
Project. (2005). Personality profiles of cultures: aggregate personality traits. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 407-425.
Mortensen, C. R., Becker, D. V., Ackerman, J. M., Neuberg, S. L., and Kenrick, D. T. (in
press). Infection breeds reticence: The effects of disease salience on self-
perceptions of personality and behavioral tendencies. Psychological Science.
Murdoch, G. P. (1949). Social structure. New York, NY: MacMillan.
Murray, D. R., and Schaller, M. (2010). Historical prevalence of infectious diseases within
230 geopolitical regions: a tool for investigating origins of culture. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology 41, 99-108.
Navarrete, C. D., and Fessler, D. M. T. (2006). Disease avoidance and ethnocentrism: the
effects of disease vulnerability and disgust sensitivity on intergroup attitudes.
Evolution of Human Behavior, 27, 270-282.
Nettle, D. (2005). An evolutionary approach to the extraversion continuum. Evolution of
Human Behavior, 26, 363-373.
Nettle, D. (2009). Ecological influences on human behavioural diversity: a review of recent
findings. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 24, 618-624.
Oliveira, R. F., Taborski, M., and Brockman, H. J. (2008). Alternative reproductive tactics:
An integrated approach. Cambridge University Press.
Pearce-Duvet, J. M. C. (2006). The origin of human pathogens: evaluating the role of agri-
culture and domestic animals in the evolution of human disease. Biological
Reviews, 81, 369-382.
Price-Smith, A. T. (2002). The health of nations: infectious disease, environmental change,
and their effects on national security and development. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Quinlan, R. J. (2007). Human parental effort and environmental risk. Proceedings of the
Royal Society B, 274, 121-125.
Rogers, A. R., and Cashdan, E. (1997). The phylogenetic approach to comparing human
populations. Evolution and Human Behavior, 1, 353-358.
Ross, M. H., and Homer, E. (1976). Galton's problem in cross-national research. World
The parasite-stress model of human personality and societal values
Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 8(2). 2010. - 169-
Politics, 29, 1-28.
Schaller, M., and Murray, D. R. (2008). Pathogens, personality and culture: disease preva-
lence predicts worldwide variability in sociosexuality, extraversion, and openness to
experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 212-221.
Schwartz, S. H. (2004). Mapping and interpreting cultural differences around the world. In
H. Vinkin, J. Soeters, and P. Ester (Eds.), Comparing cultures: dimensions of
culture in a comparative perspective (pp. 43-73). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Sherman, P. W., and Billing, J. (1999). Darwinian gastronomy: why we use spices.
BioScience, 49, 453-463.
Simpson, J. A., and Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: evi-
dence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 60, 870-883.
Smith, K.F., Sax, D. F., Gaines, S. D., Guernier, V., and Guégan, J.-F. (2007). Globaliza-
tion of human infectious disease. Ecology, 88, 1903-1910.
Suh, E., Diener, E., Oishi, S., and Triandis, H. C. (1998). The shifting basis of life satisfac-
tion judgments across cultures: emotions versus norms. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 74, 482–493.
Tanaka, M. M., Kumm, J., and Feldman, M. W. (2002). Coevolution of pathogens and
cultural practices: a new look at behavioral heterogeneity in epidemics. Theoretical
Population Biology 62, 111-119.
Thornhill, R., Fincher, C. L., and Aran, D. (2009). Parasites, democratization and the
liberalization of values across contemporary countries. Biological Reviews, 84, 113-
131.
Thornhill, R., and Gangestad, S.W. (2008). The evolutionary biology of human female
sexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Vanhanen, T. (2003). Democratization: a comparative analysis of 170 countries. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Wejnert, B. (2005). Diffusion, development, and democracy, 1800–1999. American Socio-
logical Review, 70, 53-81.
Welzel, C. (2007). Are levels of democracy affected by mass attitudes? Testing attainment
and sustainment effects on democracy. International Political Science Review, 28,
397-424.
Content uploaded by Randy Thornhill
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Randy Thornhill on Jan 13, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
