This one also shows up as a chapter in The Literary Animal. The now notorious (and somewhat tendentious) review published in Evolutionary Psychology had the following to say:
"Whether a slight preference to 'hook up sexually with George Staunton' actually demonstrates that these participants 'properly [emphasis added] interpret archaic character descriptions' leaves entertaining food for thought; how worthwhile such thought might be is another issue."
This one also shows up as a chapter in The Literary Animal. The now notorious (and somewhat tendentious) review published in Evolutionary Psychology had the following to say:
ReplyDelete"Whether a slight preference to 'hook up sexually with George Staunton' actually demonstrates that these participants 'properly [emphasis added] interpret archaic character descriptions' leaves entertaining food for thought; how worthwhile such thought might be is another issue."
I suppose it's not worthwhile if you don't particularly care about female psychology.
ReplyDelete