Journal of Bioeconomics

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 153–157 | Cite as

Fair is foul, and foul is fair: experimental evolutionary studies of mismatch

Article

Abstract

We describe two types of experimental evolution studies of “mismatch” that are relevant to economics. “Evolutionary mismatch” is the concept that an organism can be importantly “out of sync” with its environment. In such cases, an organism may choose an option that is inferior to a feasible alternative. Mainstream and behavioral economics do not address the notion of evolutionary mismatch. We argue for an empirical program on mismatch utilizing the methodology of experimental evolution.

Keywords

Evolution Natural selection Preferences Mismatch Evolutionary economics 

References

  1. Becker, G. (1976, September). Altruism, egoism, and genetic fitness: Economics and sociobiology. Journal of Economic Literature 14(3): 817–826.Google Scholar
  2. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss, volume I: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  3. Burnham, T., & Phelan, J. (2000). Mean genes. From food to sex to money, taming our primal instincts. Cambridge: Mass, Perseus.Google Scholar
  4. Burnham, T. C. (2016). Economics and evolutionary mismatch: Humans in novel settings do not maximize. Journal of Bioeconomics, 18(3), 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burnham, T. C., Dunlap, A., & Stephens, D. W. (2015). Experimental evolution and economics (pp. 1–17). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Hansson, I. & Stuart, C. (1990, June). Malthusian selection of preferences. American Economic Review 80(3): 529–544.Google Scholar
  7. Petrie, M. (1994). Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains. Nature, 371(6498), 598–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Petrie, M., Tim, H., & Carolyn, S. (1991). Peahens prefer peacocks with elaborate trains. Animal Behaviour, 41(2), 323–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Petrie, M., & Williams, A. (1993). Peahens lay more eggs for Peacocks with larger tails. Proceedings: Biological Sciences, 251(1331), 127–131.Google Scholar
  10. Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection-A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chapman UniversityOrangeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Life Sciences Core EducationUCLALos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations