Order:
Disambiguations
Doug Jones [6]Douglas Jones [1]
  1.  64
    Criteria of facial attractiveness in five populations.Doug Jones & Kim Hill - 1993 - Human Nature 4 (3):271-296.
    The theory of sexual selection suggests several possible explanations for the development of standards of physical attractiveness in humans. Asymmetry and departures from average proportions may be markers of the breakdown of developmental stability. Supernormal traits may present age- and sex-typical features in exaggerated form. Evidence from social psychology suggests that both average proportions and (in females) “neotenous” facial traits are indeed more attractive. Using facial photographs from three populations (United States, Brazil, Paraguayan Indians), rated by members of the same (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  2.  75
    Human kinship, from conceptual structure to grammar.Doug Jones - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (5):367-381.
    Research in anthropology has shown that kin terminologies have a complex combinatorial structure and vary systematically across cultures. This article argues that universals and variation in kin terminology result from the interaction of (1) an innate conceptual structure of kinship, homologous with conceptual structure in other domains, and (2) principles of optimal, “grammatical” communication active in language in general. Kin terms from two languages, English and Seneca, show how terminologies that look very different on the surface may result from variation (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3.  15
    The Matrilocal Tribe.Doug Jones - 2011 - Human Nature 22 (1-2):177-200.
    This article integrates (1) research in the historical dynamics of state societies relating group solidarity and group expansion to cultural frontiers, (2) comparative research in anthropology relating matrilocality to a particular variety of internal politics and a particular form of warfare, and (3) interdisciplinary reconstructions of large-scale “demic expansions” and associated kinship systems in prehistory. The argument is that “metaethnic frontiers,” where very different cultures clash, are centers for the formation of larger, more enduring, and more militarily effective groups. In (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  4.  18
    Limiting the Unlimited.Douglas Jones - 2002 - American Journal of Semiotics 18 (1-4):127-142.
    Umberto Eco’s notion of an “open work” embraces a Peircean pragmatism in order to avoid the extremes of both a bounded authorial intent and an unbounded post-structuralism, but this brand of pragmatism does not succeed in providing objective constraints on interpretation due to an unnecessary commitment to a Saussurrean net of meaning signification. Eco’s arguments for this commitment fail upon simple phenomenological reflection, and the whole commitment proves to be unnecessary for Eco’s fruitful insights of the open work. Successful interpretation (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  23
    Thinking about kinship and thinking.Doug Jones - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (5):404-416.
    The target article proposes a theory uniting the anthropological study of kin terminology with recent developments in linguistics and cognitive science. The response to comments reaches two broad conclusions. First, the theory may be relevant to several current areas of research, including (a) the nature and scope of the regular, side of language, (b) the organization of different domains of conceptual structure, including parallels across domains, their taxonomic distribution and implications for evolution, and (c) the influence of conceptual structure on (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  16
    Varieties of group selection.Doug Jones - 1996 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (4):778-779.
    Group selection may be defined either broadly or narrowly. Narrowly defined group selection may involve either selection for altruism or group selection between alternative evolutionarily stable states. The last variety of group selection is likely to have been particularly important in human evolution.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark