ETHNIC IDENTITY An Integrative Evolutionary Perspective on Ethnicity

This paper integrates several different but mutually consistent evolutionary approaches to ethnicity: genetic similarity theory, social identity theory, individualism/collectivism, an evolved racial/ethnic human kinds module, and rational choice mechanisms relying on domain general cognitive mechanisms. These theories are consistent with each other, and together they illustrate the interplay of evolved cognitive and motivational systems with mechanisms of rational choice that are able to choose adaptive strategies in uncertain, novel environments. Kevin MacDonald is Professor of Psychology at California State University–Long Beach, Long Beach, CA 90840-0901, USA (email: Kmacd@cox.net). His research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives in developmental psychology, certain historical phenomena (e.g., the origins of monogamous marriage), and ethnic relations (human group evolutionary strategies). After receiving a Masters degree in evolutionary biology, he received a Ph. D. in Biobehavioral Sciences, both at the University of Connecticut. His dissertation focused on behavioral development in wolves and was done under the direction of Benson E. Ginsburg. He continued developmental research during a post-doctoral fellowship at the University of Illinois under Ross D. Parke, performing research on human parent-child play, particularly rough and tumble play characteristic of fathers. His most recent book is Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Development, Second edition (edited with R.L. Burgess), Sage, 2004. This article develops a pluralistic account of theories underlying ethnocentrism, ethnic identity, and relations between ethnic groups. Ethnicity is not unique in calling for theoretical pluralism. Pluralism of mechanisms devoted to solving the same adaptive problem is common, especially, I suggest, for systems designed to solve problems with very high potential costs or benefits for the organism. For example, an adequate theory of aggression must include universal adaptations triggered in specific contexts (e.g., sexual jealousy triggered by signs of infidelity; threat to an ingroup; certain types of aversive stimulation—Berkowitz, 1982; Buss, 1999). However, we also need theories that can account for sex differences, individual differences, and group differences in aggression. These imply the importance of genetic and environmental influences on a variety of evolved systems, including temperament/personality differences in behavioral approach systems associated with aggression (sensation seeking, impulsivity, and social dominance). Also implicated are differences in emotionality, which subsumes variation in the tendency to exhibit anger, a primary emotion of aggression, and sociopathy, which includes variation in the opposing emotions of sympathy, empathy, and love (MacDonald, 1995). Finally, learning mechanisms, such as being exposed to successful or unsuccessful models and negative reinforcement, and cognitive mechanisms (e.g., tendencies to over-attribute hostile intent) have also been implicated in aggression (Coie and Dodge, 1998). A similar situation obtains with the fear system, where there are sex-differentiated personality systems (the behavioral inhibition system, emotionality), domain-specific modules designed to respond to evolutionarily significant sources of fear (snakes, spiders), domain-general learning systems (classical conditioning) able to respond to novel sources of fear, and general intelligence able to develop elaborate plans to escape sources of fear (Gray and McNaughton, 2000; LeDoux, 1996; MacDonald and Chiappe, 2002; Öhmann and Mineka, 2001). The following discusses five systems underlying the phenomenon of ethnic identity: genetic similarity theory, a racial/ethnic human kinds module, social identity mecha-