The observed morphological variation within primates is a result of the fact that organisms change over time. It is unknown if the morphology of the anterior neck is itself a product of evolution in response to functional demands or if its morphology is a correlated response to other, related traits, namely the mandible, thorax, or shoulder. As the hyoid does not articulate with any other part of the bony skeleton in most primates, it has potential independence from other regions. This dissertation adds to a growing body of studies that use a whole organism approach to examining multi-trait evolution. The foundation within this approach is that one cannot assume a trait evolves independent of others, and that such evolutionary covariance should be explicitly assessed through a model-based approach. A comparative approach investigates anterior neck evolvability and responses to selection in anatomical regions across primate taxa. A sample of extant primates, which represent variations within a range of environments and utilize different masticatory functions, are examined to provide novel insights into the origin of primate hyoid diversity. Traits may evolve through shared responses in genetically, developmentally, or functionally covarying traits, from a variety of mechanisms. I provide insight into how evolutionary relationships among the skeletal elements under study have changed among primates within the context of evolvability and morphological integration. Evolvability and conditioned covariances are measured between the hyoid and adjacent regions within a human sample. Furthermore, I compare the integration and evolutionary potential of these regions among nonhuman primate taxa. Results indicate that the hyoid does not evolve independently, rather its highly autonomous evolutionary potential is influenced by traits of the anterior thorax and mandible most notably, and to a lesser extent the basicranium, cervical vertebra, and shoulder girdle. Further, different patterns of covariance among primate anatomical regions affect trait to respond to directional selection, and evolutionary covariance among these regions is in part due to size and shape related functional variance. These results and those from several previous studies suggest taking caution when ascribing evolutionary explanations to observed patters of morphological changes within a single anatomical region.