DurginF. H.BairdJ. A.GreenbergM.RussellR.ShaughnessyK.WaymouthS. (2009). Who is being deceived? The experimental demands of wearing a backpack. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 964–969.
2.
FirestoneC. (2013). How “paternalistic” is spatial perception? Why wearing a heavy backpack doesn’t—and couldn’t—make hills look steeper. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 455–473.
3.
FirestoneC.SchollB. J. (in press). Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for ‘top-down’ effects [Target article]. Behavioral & Brain Sciences.
4.
HaseltonM. G.BussD. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81–91.
5.
KurzbanR. (2011). Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite: Evolution and the modular mind. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
KurzbanR.AktipisC. A. (2007). Modularity and the social mind: Are psychologists too self-ish?Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 131–149.
7.
LiZ.DurginF. H. (2009). Downhill slopes look shallower from the edge. Journal of Vision, 9(11), Article 6. doi:10.1167/9.11.6
8.
MurrayD. R.MurphyS. C.von HippelW.TriversR.HaseltonM. G. (2017). A preregistered study of competing predictions suggests that mendo overestimate women’s sexual intent. Psychological Science, 28, 253–255.
9.
PerillouxC. (2014). (Mis)reading the signs: Men’s perception of women’s sexual interest. In Weekes-ShackelfordV. A.ShackelfordT. K. (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on human sexual psychology and behavior (pp. 119–133). New York, NY: Springer.
10.
PerillouxC.KurzbanR. (2015). Do men overperceive women’s sexual interest?Psychological Science, 26, 70–77.
11.
PinkerS. (2011). Representations and decision rules in the theory of self-deception [Commentary]. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 34, 35–37.