Car and motorcycle deaths: an evolutionary perspective

Abstract Our aim was to assess differences between men and women in the likelihood of exposure to traffic as drivers of cars and motorcycles, and in the risk of dying from a car or a motorcycle crash, in order to verify the extent to which Darwin's Sexual Selection Theory could have predicted the findings and can help to interpret them. Study population was composed of men and women aged 18 to 60 years residents in the state of Rio de Janeiro between 2004 and 2010, and in the state of Rio Grande do Sul between 2001 and 2010. We built frequency distribution tables and drew bar charts in order to check whether there were differences between the sexes and interactions of sex with age. More men exposed themselves to and died in traffic than women, especially the young. Society should have an especially vigilant attitude towards men on the wheel due to their increased innate tendency to exposure to risk. Darwin's sexual selection theory can be an important ally when postulating hypotheses and interpreting epidemiological findings aiming at improving public policies to reduce the excessive number of traffic deaths, especially in societies where machismo is strong or the stimulus to masculinity is exaggerated.

[The evolution of human cultural behavior: notes on Darwinism and complexity]

The article analyzes three schools that can be understood as central in studies of the evolution of human behavior within the paradigm of evolution by natural selection: human behavioral ecology (HBE), evolutionary psychology, and dual inheritance. These three streams of thought are used to depict the Darwinist landscape and pinpoint its strong suits and limitations. Theoretical gaps were identified that seem to reduce these schools' ability to account for the diversity of human evolutionary behavior. Their weak points include issues related to the concept of reproductive success, types of adaptation, and targets of selection. An interdisciplinary approach is proposed as the solution to this dilemma, where complex adaptive systems would serve as a source.

When Peanuts Fall in Love: N400 Evidence for the Power of Discourse

In linguistic theories of how sentences encode meaning, a distinction is often made between the context-free rule-based combination of lexical-semantic features of the words within a sentence (“semantics”), and the contributions made by wider context (“pragmatics”). In psycholinguistics, this distinction has led to the view that listeners initially compute a local, context-independent meaning of a phrase or sentence before relating it to the wider context. An important aspect of such a two-step perspective on interpretation is that local semantics cannot initially be overruled by global contextual factors. In two spoken-language event-related potential experiments, we tested the viability of this claim by examining whether discourse context can overrule the impact of the core lexical-semantic feature animacy, considered to be an innate organizing principle of cognition. Two-step models of interpretation predict that verb-object animacy violations, as in “The girl comforted the clock,” will always perturb the unfolding interpretation process, regardless of wider context. When presented in isolation, such anomalies indeed elicit a clear N400 effect, a sign of interpretive problems. However, when the anomalies were embedded in a supportive context (e.g., a girl talking to a clock about his depression), this N400 effect disappeared completely. Moreover, given a suitable discourse context (e.g., a story about an amorous peanut), animacy-violating predicates (“the peanut was in love”) were actually processed more easily than canonical predicates (“the peanut was salted”). Our findings reveal that discourse context can immediately overrule local lexical-semantic violations, and therefore suggest that language comprehension does not involve an initially context-free semantic analysis.

Developmental dynamics: toward a biologically plausible evolutionary psychology

There has been a conceptual revolution in the biological sciences over the past several decades. Evidence from genetics, embryology, and developmental biology has converged to offer a more epigenetic, contingent, and dynamic view of how organisms develop. Despite these advances, arguments for the heuristic value of a gene-centered, predeterministic approach to the study of human behavior and development have become increasingly evident in the psychological sciences during this time. In this article, the authors review recent advances in genetics, embryology, and developmental biology that have transformed contemporary developmental and evolutionary theory and explore how these advances challenge gene-centered explanations of human behavior that ignore the complex, highly coordinated system of regulatory dynamics involved in development and evolution.

Evolutionary psychology: toward a unifying theory and a hybrid science

Although evolutionary psychology is typically associated with "selfish gene theory," numerous other approaches to the study of mind and behavior provide a wealth of concepts for theorizing about psychology, culture, and development. These include general evolutionary approaches and theories focused on sociality, dual inheritance, multilevel selection, and developmental systems. Most evolutionary accounts use the same methods as Darwin-the "fit among facts"-to use natural selection as an explanation for behavior. Scientific standards for constraining and evaluating such accounts, research into the mutual influence of science and society on the understanding of evolution, and computational technologies for modeling species-typical processes are important considerations. Coevolutionary theories and developmental systems theories may eventually give rise to unification in a broad and general sense. Such a unification would be interdisciplinary and problem centered rather than discipline centered.

Controversies in the evolutionary social sciences: a guide for the perplexed

It is 25 years since modern evolutionary ideas were first applied extensively to human behavior, jump-starting a field of study once known as 'sociobiology'. Over the years, distinct styles of evolutionary analysis have emerged within the social sciences. Although there is considerable complementarity between approaches that emphasize the study of psychological mechanisms and those that focus on adaptive fit to environments, there are also substantial theoretical and methodological differences. These differences have generated a recurrent debate that is now exacerbated by growing popular media attention to evolutionary human behavioral studies. Here, we provide a guide to current controversies surrounding evolutionary studies of human social behavior, emphasizing theoretical and methodological issues. We conclude that a greater use of formal models, measures of current fitness costs and benefits, and attention to adaptive tradeoffs, will enhance the power and reliability of evolutionary analyses of human social behavior.

Evolutionary Psychology

Evolutionary psychology (EP) presents a new, integrated approach to human behavior, by explaining how the mental programs, designed by evolutionary selection, guide our social behavior. It claims that cognitive and emotional processes—that is domain-specific algorithms—have been selected in our evolutionary environment as devices of solving particular adaptive problems faced by the Pleistocene hunter-gatherers. Evolutionary psychologists can develop testable explanations that focus on aspects and mechanisms of behavior that cannot readily be explained with current psychological theories. An adaptationist approach provides a powerful explanatory framework that helps us to eliminate the old dichotomies from our thinking, such as innate and learned, universality and diversity, etc. At the same time, however, evolutionary psychology implies several problems and difficulties that should be solved in the future in order to avoid useless confrontations with psychologists. The message of Darwinism to psychology is that the analysis of the evolution of mental capacities and the explanation of the adaptive mechanisms of behavior are crucial contributions to forming an integrated view of ourselves.