Talk: Capture-bonding

The version here on Nov. 20, 2007 is a Wikipedia version largely due to the notorious Sadi Carnot who was finally banned from Wikipedia.

I am trying to get access to better versions to replace it. If not I will rewrite it.

Keith Henson (mentioned in the article and have published on the topic)

Page numbers for quotes

Please put comments and responses below and after each indented section, not interspersed, so it is easier to follow. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 13:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC) can you provide page numbers for the quotes? If not, it may be best to just include the citation, but not the quote. For citations the usual format is Author, year, title, journal name, vol number, page #'s. with the ref tags. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 01:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed the following reference because the article does not make mention of Capture bonding, but does of EP.

evolutionary psychology

Direction and clean up

What I am working on is cleaning up this article by fixing references and checking citations. The article needs some work to put it into format similiar to other articles here; the scientific presentation of material focusing on Psychology and Psychological theories.

I removed the following section because I did not find material to support it in the citations given.

John Tooby (then a graduate student at Harvard University) originated the concept and its ramifications in the early 1980s, though he did not publish..) The term is fairly widely used on the Web and has begun to show up in books.

Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 13:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the direct quote in the article for this section, can you direct us to that?

One of the "adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors," particularly our female ancestors, was being abducted by another band. Life in the human "environment of evolutionary adaptiveness" (EEA) is thought by researchers such as Azar Gat to be similar to that of the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies. "Deadly violence is also regularly activated in competition over women. . . . Abduction of women, rape, . . . are widespread direct causes of reproductive conflict . . ." I.e., being captured When selection is intense and persistent, adaptive traits (such as capture-bonding) become universal to the population or species. (See Selection.)

Partial activation of the capture-bonding psychological trait may lie behind Battered-wife syndrome, military basic training, fraternity hazing, and sex practices such as sadism/masochism or bondage/discipline.

If you can provide the page number for these statements, that would be most helpful and then I can redit the article to include this material. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 23:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

For this one we need citations.

Cynthia Ann Parker (1836 capture) is both an example of the mechanism working and it failing to work when she was captured again much later in life. Evolutionary psychology reasoning would lead you to expect that capture-bonding would be more effective at a younger age when there was more reproductive potential at risk. She did very well evolutionary terms because her son Quanah Parker had 25 children. Mary Jemison (1750 capture) was a very famous case. The last one (1851 capture) may have been Olive Oatman.

Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 23:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

References

Added this section to make the current "references" easier to read.

Source material

Now at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hkhenson/Capture_bonding

See the talk page too. Hkhenson 14:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I see the article there, but the talk page has been deleted by an administrator. If you could just provide the citations and page numbers we could begin cleaning up this material and adding back what is relevant. BTW, private e-mails, while personally interesting, don't really meet the criteria of being reliable and verifiable. As a professional site, a good guide to use is the APA text on style. You can also look at how to cite sources. I look forward to working with you on this material. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 15:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I am trying to get the talk page restored as well. Re private e-mails, I am very annoyed at Dr. Tooby for not publishing on capture-bonding (or whatever he called it when he was discussing it in the early 80s). But I since I have knowledge he did, even though he didn't publish, I can't take credit for originating the concept--in fact feel required to credit Dr. Tooby [2]. I did put this knowledge in the article here: http://human-nature.com/nibbs/02/cults.html footnote 4 (the whole on line journal edited by two respected PhDs has been called into question by wiki lawyers as not being a reliable source in the arguments to delete capture-bonding from Wikipedia. These people did not have the slightest knowledge about evolutionary psychology.)

I would really think twice about applying Wikipedia policies to Wikia. I think experts writing readable articles are more important than sticking to a strict policy. After all, that's what drove me (and this article) from Wikipedia. (Though there is nothing wrong with the APA style if you need to reference something.) Hkhenson 04:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Cite for the John Tooby mention. Footnote 4 in Henson, H. K. (2002). Sex, Drugs, and Cults. Human Nature Review. 2: 343-355.

For the quote One of the "adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors," http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/primer.html The quote is from the second paragraph of the introduction.

Nice work. Let me read it in detail.

I agree that certain Wikipedia policies would need to be edited and adapted to The Psychology Wiki. I also think that using generally accepted standards in the field, such as the APA Publication Manual, which describes not only formating, but style and criteria for material, is important to ensure the credibility of this site with the Psychology professional community. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 13:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Part of the reconsideration of policies is "who is coming here and why are they reading this wiki?" I can read the stilted style of professional journals but high school students (who I consider the main targets) are going to be driven away. They need clear writing, something rarely found in a lot of professional journals.

Also, I think you are overly optimistic to think that the Psychology professional community would consider any wiki credible. Not unless some group like the APA ruled it with an iron hand. While I don't hold this opinion strongly, there really is a conflict between making an encyclopedia useful and making it conform to professional style. I would appreciate your thoughts on this point. Hkhenson 13:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, now I see your perspective. Actually this site is directed toward the professional community, not H.S. students. (read the main page and descriptions of the purpose and function of this site.) My understanding is that Dr. Kiff's purpose is to make this a site for professional psychologists...and the general public too, but written professionally and, preferably, by professionals. Writing style is different (stilted or clear) that the standards used to present material (a different type of style). Generally, adhering to the APA Manual will be our best approach to the presentation of material. This has to do with the verifiability and reliability of sources and standards for citations and evidence. I hope this helps. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 14:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It does help. I should try to find another wiki for this kind of work because while I happen to be at the expert knowledge level for the evolutionary psychology corner of psychology, I am not a professional. (The way I came by this knowledge was more time consuming and expensive than any PhD program.) What fooled me here was the copying of articles from Wikipedia where the professionals seldom went and the experts are being driven out.

If you didn't know it already, EP is a most contentious subject in psychology and sociology. You might appreciate this. http://www.fathom.com/feature/35533/index.html While EP is relatively young, it makes the fairly large claim that evolution is the way to connect sociology (and a lot of psychology) to the rest of science. Hkhenson 17:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

More source

(edit conflict) For the Azar Gat quote "Deadly violence is also regularly activated in competition over women. . . . Abduction of women, rape, . . . are widespread direct causes of reproductive conflict . . ." Page 15, Anthropological Quarterly, 73.2 (2000), 74-88. THE HUMAN MOTIVATIONAL COMPLEX: EVOLUTIONARY THEORY AND THE CAUSES OF HUNTER-GATHERER FIGHTING Azar Gat Part II: Proximate, Subordinate, and Derivative Causes" [3] It's on page 15 for the reprint here. I don't know how to translate that to the original journal article page and don't have access to the hard copy.

I read page 15 in detail and do not find that quote. Is it on another page or is this a paraphrase or interpretation? Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 13:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, typo, page 16, second to last paragraph. Starts:

Conflict and fighting in the human state of nature,

snip

Deadly violence is also regularly activated in competition over women. Although human males are less polygynous than those of some other species, they still compete over the quality and number of women that they can have. Abduction of women, rape, accusations of adultery, and broken promises of marriage are widespread direct causes of reproductive conflict, while resource competition in order to be able to afford more women and children is an indirect cause as well as a direct one.

The same material is almost certainly in Dr. Gat's new book _War in Human Civilization_ (Oxford UP, 2006) but I don't have a copy at hand.

Excellent! That is clear. I'd suggest putting in the full quote in context, without the ellipses (...). Thanks. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 16:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Could, it's certainly interesting stuff. But the only point relevant to the article is abduction (capture). Hkhenson 02:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that would be good. It is always best to put quotes in context so that the reader can fully appreciate the intent and meaning. regards. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 02:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Still more source

On the point that being captured was probably relatively common in the past:

"The percentage of females in the lowland villages who have been abducted is significantly higher: 17% compared to 11.7% in the highland villages."

Page 154 in Sexual Paradox: Complementarity, Reproductive Conflict and Human Emergence by Christine Fielder, Chris King - Psychology (2006) [4]

It's actually from a 1987 paper by Chagnon. Also here: [5]. The same page has another relevant quote:

"Like the Yanomamo, perpetual animosity existed between the neighboring tribes of the Jivaro.

snip

. . . wars of genocidal extermination. A significant goal of these wars was geared toward the annihilation of the enemy tribe, including women and children. This was done in order to prevent them from seeking revenge against the victors in the future. There were however, many instances where the women and children were taken as prisoners and forced to become a part of the victors families. A woman who fights, or a woman who refuses to accompany the victorious war-party to their homes and serve a new master, exposes herself to the risk of suffering the same fate as her men-folk. Up de Graff (R713 273) describes a foray with the Jivaro:

snip (gruesome)

Links fixed here:

Capture-bonding as an evolutionary psychology mechanism can be used to understand historical events from the Rape of the Sabine Women [6] to the hundreds of accounts of Europeans (mostly women) who were captured and assimilated into Native American tribes. Cynthia Ann Parker (1836 capture) [7] is both an example of the mechanism working and it failing to work when she was captured again much later in life. Evolutionary psychology reasoning would lead you to expect that capture-bonding would be more effective at a younger age when there was more reproductive potential at risk. She did very well evolutionary terms because her son Quanah Parker [8] had 25 children. Mary Jemison (1750 capture) [9] was a very famous case. The last one (1851 capture) may have been Olive Oatman [10]

Good, I'll read all this later. Again, thank you. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 16:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Not sure about this

What is this section supposed to mean?

Napoleon Chagnon quoted at states that among some primitive groups, having their dependent children killed occured.

Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 16:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

The original read "I.e., being captured [7] and having their dependent children killed might have been fairly common. [8] Women who resisted capture in such situations risked being killed. [9]"

The point to this was to explain that evolutionary pressures existed for the psychological trait(s) that--when triggered--result in the condition we call Stockholm syndrome. (As best we can tell by extrapolation from the few remaining stone age people).

Killing dependent children is an obvious strategy to prevent captured women from being motivated to escape and return to the tribe they had been abducted from. Hkhenson 04:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I think to add that back we'd need the full quote with full citation and page number so that it makes sense. Why don't you do that here for us to all look at? Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 17:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Ref 7 is on page on page 154 here: [11]

but that's quoted from Chagnon 1987. I don't have access to that journal to get the page number (not even sure what journal it was). Again the point for the article was not Chagnon's point that there is a difference between the lowland and highland abduction rates but that even the lower of the two was over 10% of the women. As little as 1% of a population being subjected to intense selection pressure will fix an advantageous trait.

Ref 8 is on page 156 of this book right above the discussion of what happens to Jivaro women who don't go along with being captured, but it's a quote from Hrdy, R330 241. Again I don't know what journal it was in.

Wouldn't having the parent keep the child make it less likely the person would leave? Harder to travel and move without a young child in tow. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 17:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps. But the men are after sex (mates) and in that culture they don't have sexual relations with nursing women. Killing the nursing children of women they capture ends that problem. Killing the rest of the children opens up space for their own offspring in a *very* unproductive environment. The psychological trait (capture-bonding) that is the cause of Stockholm syndrome and a number of other strange human phenomena evolved in a radically different world--one so far gone from our normal experience that we can't understand why Patty Hearst and Elizabeth Smart acted the way they did. As a bet it would be obvious to the Yanamano or Jivaro. An evolutionary psychology perspective on this (and other) evolved psychological mechanisms is so trivial to people in the field that it's hardly worth mentioning. But outside the field, it's nearly impossible to explain it. Hkhenson 21:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. If you would now put below precisely what you want in the article, (the exact wording) with full citations and page numbers, let's look at that and then move along, OK? We are making good progress here on this article Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 22:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

It is taking serious effort to track down the original references. Turns out the one about the Jivaro head hunters is out of a 1925 book. The Hrdy reference is also out of a book. I don't remember if books are permitted as reference sources. If they are not, the same materials are probably in a journal *somewhere* but will take an awful lot of time and effort to track down. Hkhenson 16:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Sure, books are valid, verifiable, references...not all are reliable, but that is a different story. The correct manner to cite a book is, Last name, first name (year) Title. City, State, Country. ISBN number (if available). The book should be available. Yes, sourcing material can be a lot of work...in the end it makes for a much more reliable, professional, and useful article. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 01:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

references

Chagnon, Napoleon 1997 Yanomamo (5th ed) Harcourt Brace, NY.

(Chagnon page 87):

“The most startling difference is the degree to which violence and warfare-and the consequences of these distinguish highland and lowland groups from each other. Warfare is much more highly developed and chronic in the lowlands. Men in the lowland villages seem 'pushy' and aggressive, but men from the smaller, highland villages seem sedate and gentle. Not unexpectedly, alliance patterns are more elaborate in the lowlands and dramatic, large, regular feasts are characteristic, events in which large groups invite their current allies to feast and trade. Larger numbers of women in lowland villages are either abducted from or ‘coerced’ from weaker, smaller neighbors, including highland villages. By contrast, highland villages have fewer abducted women, and when they do, they usually come from other small highland groups, not from the more bellicose, larger, and more powerful lowland villages. Fewer of the adult men in the highland villages are unokais, who have participated in the killing of other men. There, the average fraction of adult males who have participated in the killing of another person is over twice as high (44%) but the average number of victims killed per unokai is only slightly higher in the lowland villages, 1.13 compared to 0.96. The percentage of females in the lowland villages who have been abducted is significantly higher: 17% compared to 11.7% in the highland villages”.

Of which only the last sentence is relevant to the article.

Hrdy, Sarah Blaffer 1999 Mother Nature : A History of Mothers, Infants, and Natural Selection Pantheon New York.

(Hrdy page 241). Elena Valero, a Brazilian woman was kidnapped by Yanomamo warriors when she was eleven years old at a time when intertribal warfare and raiding for women was still endemic. No sooner was she kidnapped than Elena Valero’s captors were themselves attacked by rival Yanomamo. Again she was taken captive and handed over to one of her abductors as a wife. She would spend the next twenty years among the Karawetari, marry twice with different captors and bear three children before finally escaping. She would witness, and hear about, many more raids. But none were so horrifying as the second one: ‘They killed so many. I was weeping for fear and for pity but there was nothing I could do. They snatched the children from their mothers to kill them, while the others held the mothers tightly by the arms and wrists as they stood up in a line. All the women wept’. They fled before the raiders, taking their children with them. ‘The men began to kill the children; little ones, bigger ones, they killed many of them. They tried to run away, but [the Karawetari raiders] caught them, and threw them to the ground, and stuck them with bows, which went through their bodies and rooted them to the ground. Taking the smallest by the feet, they beat them against the trees and the rocks. The children's eyes trembled. Then the men took the dead bodies and threw them among the rocks, saying, ‘Stay there, so that your fathers can find you and eat you.’ One woman pleaded, ‘It's a little girl, you mustn’t kill her.’ Another gambled desperately to save the life of a two-year-old snatched from her arms by telling the raider, ‘Don't kill him, he's your son. The mother was with you and she ran away when she was already pregnant with this child. He's one of your sons!’ The man mulled over this possibility before replying, ‘No, he's [another group's] child. It's too long since [that woman was] with us.’ The man then took the baby by his feet and bashed him against the rocks. When much later, anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon interviewed different Yanomamo groups, people told him about women being kidnaped, their infants merely left behind to starve.

Of which I only used "Elena Valero, a Brazilian woman, was kidnapped by Yanomamo warriors when she was eleven years old . . . . But none were so horrifying as the second [raid]: ‘They killed so many.’ . . . The man then took the baby by his feet and bashed him against the rocks . . . ."

King, Chris and Fielder, Christine, Sexual Paradox: Complementarity, Reproductive Conflict and Human Emergence 2006 Lulu.com ISBN: 978-1-4116-5532-4

pages 156-157

The Jivaro are even more extremely violent than the Yanomamo, having a war homicide rate of about 60% of men, although modern changes are leading to social resolution of physical conflicts. They are renowned as the one Amazonian tribe who practised head-shrinking. They refused to be suppressed by the Inca and revolted against the Spanish Empire and thwarted all subsequent attempts by the Spaniards to conquer them. In the year 1599, the Jivaros banded together and killed 25,000 white people in raids on two settlements. The attack was instigated over the natives being taxed in their gold-trade. After uncovering the unscrupulous practices of the visiting governor, molten gold was later poured down his throat until his bowels burst. Following his execution, the remaining Spaniards were killed along with the older women and children. The younger useful women were taken as prisoners to join the clan.

Like the Yanomamo, perpetual animosity existed between the neighboring tribes of the Jivaro. The Shaur and Achuar Jivaros, once deadly enemies have only recently formed a tribal federation. Among the Jivaro, as among the Yanomamo, there is no stratification - but egalitarian warriorship. During times of peace there's no chieftain. When wars erupt, older experienced men who have killed many men and captured many heads are chosen as war chiefs. No Jivaro can be chosen if he has not killed. Bloody feuds, reported as functioning to obtain women, are frequent and follow familial lines (Low 192). A fundamental difference between wars enacted within the same tribe and against neighboring tribes is such that wars between different tribes are in principle wars of genocidal extermination. A significant goal of these wars was geared toward the annihilation of the enemy tribe, including women and children. This was done in order to prevent them from seeking revenge against the victors in the future. There were however, many instances where the women and children were taken as prisoners and forced to become a part of the victors families. A woman who fights, or a woman who refuses to accompany the victorious war-party to their homes and serve a new master, exposes herself to the risk of suffering the same fate as her men-folk. Up de Graff (Page 273) describes a foray with the Jivaro:

“A Huambiza woman who had fallen in the fight wounded by 3 spears. Little did we imagine what the ultimate issue might prove to be, when we attacked that morning. The woman lay there where she had been borne down by the spear-thrusts. The Agurunas eager to collect her head, went to work while she was still alive, though powerless to protect herself. While one wrenches at her head another held her to the ground, and yet another hacked her neck with his stone-ax. Finally I was called upon to lend my machete, a far better implement for the work in hand. This was truly an act of mercy, to put the poor creature out of her misery as soon as possible. It was truly a hideous spectacle.”

The last quote is from Up De Graff F. 1925 Head hunters of the Amazon: Seven Years of Exploration and Adventure,Garden City, New York: but I didn't use any of it. What I did use was:

"The Shaur and Achuar Jivaros, once deadly enemies . . . . A significant goal of these wars was geared toward the annihilation of the enemy tribe, including women and children. . . . . There were however, many instances where the women and children were taken as prisoners . . . . A woman who fights, or a woman who refuses to accompany the victorious war-party to their homes and serve a new master, exposes herself to the risk of suffering the same fate as her men-folk."

The point is to show that *if* the human EEA was similar to the close-to-stone-age peoples described in these quotes, there was a heck of a strong evolutionary pressure to develop the capture-bonding psychological trait. Hkhenson 23:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

BTW, those of us who write about evolutionary psychology owe a deep debt to Up De Graff, Hrdy, Chagnon and an army of other field workers. They did the field work now being mined by armchair warmers like me to show how it all fits into an evolutionary psychology perspective and makes sense in biological terms. Hkhenson 23:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Very nice work, thank you. This is very good. I will read this in detail later when I get a spare moment (later this week) and then we can discuss how and where to include material. Thank you. I know this was quite time consuming. The effort will be well worth it. regards. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 00:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Article development

As you can see, the references are there to support plausibility for the selection of capture-bonding in the EEA.

The article could start, "Capture bonding is a proposed evolved psychological mechanism informally discussed by anthropologist John Tooby and other graduate students at Harvard in the early 1980s." Then it could go on to discuss the rediscovery and the proposed EEA conditions (citing these references) which led to the selection of the mechanism and some of the present day consequences.

I (being a published "expert" in the area) could write the article, but I would prefer not to. I am aware of how hard this would be for you given what a radical departure EP is from the kind of psychology that was being taught when you trained. (Re the Fathom interview cited above.)

There are other options, get someone else who has an understanding of EP to write the article or just delete it and move on. It's not like much would be lost since there are other wikis and lots of detail on capture-bonding can be found with Google. Best wishes, 216.39.182.104 15:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't realize I had not logged in. Hkhenson 17:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

questions

Regarding the proposed introduction. Do you have a citation for John Tooby and a citation regarding "other graduate students?"

You mention being a published expert in the field, could you reveal your identity and provide the citations?

If you'd like to make suggestions regarding the re-writing of the article here, we could then collaborate on improving what is currently there. I'd be quite happy to collaborate here with you.

Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 16:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The cite is footnote 4 in "Sex, Drugs and Cults," but I am currently combing through Tooby's work looking for a mention that might apply. The problem is its over 25 years ago. Hkhenson 17:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

It would be good if there were more current material. Oh, I'd thought that was you, but wasn't sure. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 18:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The problem with not citing Dr. Tooby is that we both know that I have been told about his discussing this concept back in the early 80s. I can be very annoyed at him for not publishing about capture-bonding, but it's such a simple application of EP that I understand it would not appeal to a journal and that it's utterly obvious to anyone in the field. Not being a professional academic I have to be extremely careful in giving proper credit. Hkhenson 19:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes that is a problem. However, since the site uses professional standards, we really need a reliable and verifiable source and citation to put material in articles, especially when attributing that to others, when it is cited as a "fact," and when it is a statement that needs some "support" or "justification" or evidence in support of the statement. So, if I say, "many researchers know that..." I need a citation to support that. Or, if I write, "X factor is a direct result of Y factor" I'd also need some citation to support that statement, especially if it is a statement that might be contested or disputed. Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 19:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I seem to be caught in a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation. Unless I can get Dr. Tooby to publish on the topic, the only thing to do is to delete the article. Sorry for all the effort you put into it. Hkhenson 20:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that is necessary. The article as it is now, while short, is ok. It could use more material and if that isn't possible now, I'd suggest leaving it as is and, perhaps, over time, more material can be added. I can understand your frustration. It is hard when you know something and may not have all the sources and citations necessary to support what you believe you know. I do hope you will continue to participate here. Regards, Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 20:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Analysis

As it stands, the article doesn't even make much sense.

"The evolutionary origin of this psychological phenomenon, known as the Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding within this construct,

Stockholm syndrome is a distinct _outcome_ from certain inputs acting on the (proposed if you want) capture-bonding psychological mechanism. The psychological mechanism is distinct in the same way the symptom "fever" is distinct from the diseases and metabolic defense mechanisms that result in fever. If you are going to make them the same, there is no point in a distinct article.

snip

"Deadly violence is also regularly activated in competition over women. Although human males are less polygynous than those of some other species, they still compete over the quality and number of women that they can have. Abduction of women, rape, accusations of adultery, and broken promises of marriage are widespread direct causes of reproductive conflict, while resource competition in order to be able to afford more women and children is an indirect cause as well as a direct one. pg. 16 [2]"

This just floats with nothing obvious to do with the psychological trait.

"In the view of evolutionary psychology "the mind is a set of information-processing machines that were designed by natural selection to solve adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors." [3]"

If you want to use this, it should go right after CB is defined as an EP (concept, term) evolved mechanism and then expand into the problems ancestrial women had with being abducted, the high numbers who were subjected to capture in studied bands and their fate if they lacked the ability to bond when captured.

"Capture-bonding as an evolutionary psychology hypothesis can be used to conceptualize . . ." Even in Google Scholar, "analyze" is 25 times more likely to be used than "conceptualize" and "understand" 50 times. It may be the word you wanted to use, but the obvious application of the concept to hazing, battered wife syndrome, army basic training and BDSM are more current than historical Native American or stories from pre Roman times. Hkhenson 22:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I think conceptualize is the correct word. the construct C-b is a hypothesis used to explain (conceptualize)...

Now, if you think a re-write and reorganization of the article would improve it, by all manes, why don't you put here, below, in the section I will create, your proposal...what specifically do you want the article to say...the precise wording of the proposed new article, so all can review and comment on it. OK? Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 22:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggested alternative to the current article

Capture-bonding is a descriptive evolutionary psychology (term/concept/proposal) for the evolved psychological mechanism that results in Stockholm syndrome under certain extreme conditions. John Tooby (then a graduate student at Harvard) originated the concept and its ramifications in the early 80’s though he did not publish. [12] Keith Henson [13] independently reached the same conclusions about 15 years later regarding the evolutionary origin and widespread effects of this psychological mechanism in humans and human societies.

In the view of evolutionary psychology "the mind is a set of information-processing machines that were designed by natural selection to solve adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors." [14]

One of the "adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors," particularly our female ancestors, was being abducted by another band. If life in those times was similar to that of some of the few remaining hunter-gatherer or pre-state agriculturalists peoples then being captured and having their dependent children killed was perhaps as common as one in 8 of our prehistoric female ancestors, far above that needed to fix a trait.

"The percentage of females in the lowland villages who have been abducted is significantly higher: 17% compared to 11.7% in the highland villages." (Napoleon Chagnon online at [15]

The motivation for abductions is obvious:

"Polygyny greatly exacerbated women's scarcity . . . Female infanticide was another factor contributing to women's scarcity and male competition." Azar Gat, Page 14 http://cniss.wustl.edu/workshoppapers/gatpres1.pdf

The consequences were deadly:

"Elena Valero, a Brazilian woman was kidnapped by Yanomamo warriors when she was eleven years old . . . . But none were so horrifying as the second [raid]: ‘They killed so many.’ . . . The man then took the baby by his feet and bashed him against the rocks . . . ." (Hrdy 1999) page 241 Also quoted here: [16])

"The Shaur and Achuar Jivaros, once deadly enemies . . . . A significant goal of these wars was geared toward the annihilation of the enemy tribe, including women and children. . . . . There were however, many instances where the women and children were taken as prisoners . . . . A woman who fights, or a woman who refuses to accompany the victorious war-party to their homes and serve a new master, exposes herself to the risk of suffering the same fate as her men-folk." also at [17])

There are biological and anthropological reasons to expect that war and abductions (i.e., capture of women) were typical of human pre history at least back to the time our ancestors escaped predation (at least to the taming of fire and perhaps as far back as chipped rocks 2.5 million years ago). Abduction probably applied an extreme selective genetic filter to a significant fraction of each generation. If this is correct, then the psychological traits behind capture bonding should be expected to be nearly universal.

Keith Henson used capture-bonding as an illustrative example of selected-in-the-stone age psychological traits in "Sex Drugs and Cults:" [18]

"An evolutionary psychology explanation starts by asking why such a trait would have improved the reproductive success of people during the millions of years we lived as social primates in bands or tribes? One thing that stands out from our records of the historical North American tribes, the South American tribes such as the Yanomamö, and some African tribes is that being captured was a relatively common event. If you go back a few generations, almost everyone in some of these tribes has at least one ancestor (usually a woman) who was violently captured from another tribe."

"Natural selection has left us with psychological responses to capture seen in the Stockholm Syndrome and the Patty Hearst kidnapping. Capture-bonding or social reorientation when captured from one warring tribe to another was an essential survival tool for a million years or more."

"Fighting hard to protect yourself and your relatives is good for your genes, but when captured and escape is not possible, giving up short of dying and making the best you can of the new situation is also good for your genes. In particular it would be good for genes that built minds able to dump previous emotional attachments under conditions of being captured and build new social bonds to the people who have captured you. The process should neither be too fast (because you may be rescued) nor too slow (because you don't want to excessively try the patience of those who have captured you . . .")

"An EP explanation stresses the fact that we have lots of ancestors who gave up and joined the tribe that had captured them (and sometimes had killed most of their relatives). This selection of our ancestors accounts for the extreme forms of capture-bonding exemplified by Patty Hearst and the 'Stockholm Syndrome.' . . . It accounts for battered wife syndrome, (Battered person syndrome) where beatings and abuse are observed to strengthen the bond between the victim and the abuser--at least up to a point."

Henson has proposed that the partial activation of this psychological trait accounts for other mysterious human traits such as Basic training "a mildly traumatic experience intended to produce a bond" and fraternity hazing. The difficulty colleges have had in stamping out injurious hazing may stem from instinctual knowledge of how to induce bonding in captives. He also makes a case that the intense reward from sexual practices such as BDSM derives from activation of the capture-bonding psychological mechanisms.

This is still draft. keith

Edit break

Nice work here.

I do wonder about calling this a "universal" process in that the only evidence provided are of south-american tribes and a couple of individual cases involving north-american native tribes. How do we know that this phenon. existed in Australia, Africa, or Asia?

I also have concerns about the statement,

It accounts for battered wife syndrome, (Battered person syndrome) where beatings and abuse are observed to strengthen the bond between the victim and the abuser--at least up to a point.

Here my concern is that there is already an abundant literature, with substantial empirical evidence, that explains this process and the dynamics of "battered wife" syndrome and what prevents the victim from leaving.

Same regarding hazing.

Do continue.

Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 13:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

"I do wonder . . ."

If it is an EP trait that evolved back prior to the last common ancestors, it isn't specific to a region. Also, don't forget Patty Hearst and Elizabeth Smart. I suspect this trait is almost as universal as walking. It just doesn't get activated very often in the modern world. (Thankfully!)

"I also have concerns . . ."

I just read it. To be really frank it's based on no underlying mechanisms, particularly no mechanisms based on human evolutionary history. If you are going to play by EP rules, every psychological trait is either the result of direct selection in the EEA or it's a side effect of something that was selected. You can definitely see that the mechanism behind capture bonding was directly selected because having the trait was a life or death matter in the EEA, and still is in the remaining hunter-gatherer peoples.

Drug addiction on the other hand just has to be a side effect because lying wasted on plant sap under a bush in the EEA was a way to get eaten by a predator, i.e., you didn't pass on genes after that stunt.

"Same regarding hazing."

I have never seen an explanation of hazing other than activating the capture-bonding mechanism that made a bit of sense. Further people seem to have psychological mechanisms that are engaged in both sides of hazing, battered wife and the rest. Again, you have to look at these as selected in the EEA.

Being influenced by the concepts of evolutionary psychology, I have tended to discount the idea of humans being much shaped by recent evolution. Exceptions have been accumulating, the taming of wild foxes in as few as 8 generations, and the acquisition of genes (a number of them!) for adult lactose tolerance in peoples with a dairy culture. You can get serious population average shifts in a small number of generations if the selection pressure is high enough.

Now Dr. Gregory Clark, in one of those huge efforts that lead to breakthroughs, has produced a study that makes a strong case for recent (last few hundred years) and massive changes in population average psychological traits. It leaves in place that a huge part of our psychological traits did indeed come out of the stone age, but adds to that recent and very strong selection pressures on the population of settled agriculture societies in the "Malthusian trap."

I came a bit late to this party, Dr. Clark's book _A Farewell to Alms_ peaked at 17 on Amazon's sales months ago. My copy has not come yet so I read this paper off his academic web site.

http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf

"Genetically Capitalist? The Malthusian Era, Institutions and the Formation of Modern Preferences."

This paper is just stunning because of how much light it shines on a long list of mysteries. Such as: Why did the modern world grow out of a small part of Europe and why did it take so long? Why are the Chinese doing so well compared to say Africa?

The upshot of his research was that in the Mathusian era in England people with the personality characteristics to become well off economically had at least twice as many surviving children as those in the lower economic classes--who were not replacing themselves. This, of course, led to "downward social mobility," where the numerous sons and daughters of the rich tended to be less well off (on average) than their parents. But over 20 generations (1200-1800) it did spread the genes for the personality characteristics for accumulating wealth through the entire population.

"In the institutional and technological context of these societies, a new set of human attributes mattered for the only currency that mattered in the Malthusian era, which was reproductive success. In this world literacy and numeracy, which were irrelevant before, were both helpful for economic success in agrarian pre-industrial economies. Thus since economic success was linked to reproductive success, facility with numbers and wordswas pulled along in its wake. Since patience and hard work found a new reward in a society with large amounts of capital, patience and hard work were also favored."

Fascinating work, ideas that slot right in to the rest of my understanding of the world and the people in it. I very strongly recommend reading this paper at least. Hkhenson 03:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Edit break

"I do wonder" What I mean is, what is the evidence that it is a universal phenom? The only evidence provided is some what sparse and could just as easily be explained as resulting from cultural dynamics and cultural ideosyncracies of the few native tribes mentioned.

"I also have concerns." I think we'd need more supporting evidence to try to link this theory as a causitive factor in battered wife syndrome.

One issue that, perhaps, the article might address is the question of, "Why is EP a better theory for the behaviors under discussion than those provided by cultural anthropology?

Nice dialogue here. Note, I will be away for the next two weeks, but look forward to seeing what is here on this page when I get back. Enjoy the holidays.

Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 14:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

"I do wonder" Abduction of women is reported in virtually every hunter-gatherer group studied. The psychological trait has clearly been under heavy selection for a very long time. Long enough to expect it to become very close to a universal psychological feature of humans.

"I also have concerns." Battered wife is impossible to account for at an evolutionary level without understanding it as another manifestation of the mechanisms of capture-bonding. Then it is obvious.

"Why is EP . . ." That should be addressed in the EP article. Did you read the Fathom interview with Dr. Badcock? He explains why EP is a better theory. ". . . the insights that the social sciences once had into human behaviour are now defunct." (He dropped a lifetime of Freudian psychoanalytic study to do it.)

We should probably discuss this on the phone some time. email me to set it up.

Hkhenson 08:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I am back now...let's continue this discussion here, if you don't mind, so that other editors can benefit from the dialogue.

Regarding "I do wonder," if you could provide citations to other cultures in various parts of the world, or to an authority in an Anthropological text to support the statement, that would really strengthen the argument.

Regarding, "I also have conerns," I think there are several other theories regarding why battered women stay in abusive relationships that don't require the capture bonding hypothesis: sociological power theories, psychological theories regarding dependency and other phenon.

Regarding, "Why..." I think if you can provide some material with citations for this, that would really improve this article substantially.

Dr. Becker-Weidman ^Talk 15:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Reset indents

Re cites about women abductions, they are extensively discussed in reference to a number of cultures in the already cited Azar Gat paper http://cniss.wustl.edu/workshoppapers/gatpres1a.pdf.

Re battered women, it's true that there are other theories, but capture-bonding is an EP based theory. The article is not about battered women or basic training or hazing, it's just that this theory also accounts in an obvious way for those observations.

It's also not about EP per se. I think this is the wrong place to make a case for EP. If you really want to go that way, the thing to do would be to delete this article and move the material to the EP article as an example. Did you read the Fathom article? Hkhenson 02:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)