Evolutionary Psychology 101 Humans evolved to solve recurrent problems our ancestors faced during the environment we evolved in: Pleistocene hunter-gatherers.

Evolutionary Psychology 101

Humans evolved to solve recurrent problems our ancestors faced during the environment we evolved in: Pleistocene hunter-gatherers. The mind is made up of many domain-specific

mechanisms= “modules.” Modules solve problems repeatedly encountered by our

ancestors. Only problems that recur over and over again can be

subjected to natural selection. It takes a long time to change gene frequencies. If a problem is relatively rare, evolution can’t solve it by constructing a module.

Each module is specifically designed to solve an adaptive problem: The mind as a Swiss Army knife.

Evolutionary Psychology 101

Modules are “dedicated intelligences” that receive characteristic inputs and produce characteristic output.

Modules operate unconsciously.

E.g.: Male fighting fish have a module sensitive to the color or another male (=input); when they see this, there is a characteristic output (= aggression).

This is a reflex: it operates without conscious deliberation.

Modular Information processing domains: David Geary, The Origin of Mind, 2005. Folk Psychology

Self Self awareness: Represent self as social being and have a sense of

persistence of self through time Self schema: Knowledge of one’s own personality and relationships

with other people Individual

Nonverbal behavior: e.g., postural cues Facial expression Language Theory of Mind: Ability to infer intentions, beliefs, emotional states

and future behavior of individuals; no evidence in monkeys; controversial in chimpanzees

Person Schema: Knowledge of specific other people and their networks

Group Kin recognition: Mothers and babies recognize each other by smell;

children able to identify odor of full siblings, not half siblings or step-siblings

In-group/Out-group

Modular Information processing domains: David Geary, The Origin of Mind, 2005. Folk Biology

All humans classify flora and fauna on basis of morphology, behavior, growth patterns, and ecological niche;

Disruptions of anterior temporal cortex disrupts ability to name living but not non-living things. (Not conclusive)

Folk Physics Systems sensitive to invariant features of physical space. For humans, this includes ability to mentally represent

physical objects and manipulate the objects, as in tool use. These may engage working memory: spatial intelligence.

Navigation via mental maps of routes and landmarks both involve parietal cortex, but route task also involved hippocampus. Posterior hippocampus of taxi drivers in London larger than age-matched men. Volume correlated with time spent as taxi driver (Maguire et al., 2000)

Characteristics of Implicit and Explicit Cognitive Systems

Implicit System Explicit System

o Unconscious Consciouso Automatic Controllableo Fast Relatively slowo Evolved Early Evolved Lateo Common among animals May be unique

to humans

Characteristics of Implicit and Explicit Cognitive Systems

Implicit System Explicit Systemo Parallel Processing Sequential Processing

o Many modules One thought after

operate at the same time another. Can’t watch TV

e.g., face recognition and and read your email.

color perception

o High capacity Limited by attentional and working memory resources.

o Effortless Effortful

Life without implicit processing

Implicit Processing versus Explicit Processing: Moral Outrage Sanfey et al. 2003: “The Neural Basis of Economic

Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game” Science, 300, 1755.

Proposer offers to split $10, and responder can either accept or reject offer. Only one interaction. More people will reject unfair offers (9-1, 8-2)

made by other people than offers made by computers

This is irrational: Should accept any offer greater than 10-0.

Implicit Processing versus Explicit Processing: Moral Outrage Conflict between explicit processing areas of brain and

implicit processing areas of the brain: Implicit processing: Automatic moral outrage at the unfair

offer; subcortex lights up. Explicit processing: Prefrontal Cortex activated to make

rational decision. Conflict between emotional goal (resist unfairness)

produced by implicit processing and explicit processing goal (get as much money as possible).

For some people, the implicit processing wins out and they reject the unfair offers.

For others, the explicit processing wins out and they accept the unfair offer.

Conscientiousness: Control of implicit processing by the Prefrontal cortexConscientiousness in personality psychology:

Effortful Control: Involves explicit processing Delay of gratification Inhibition of dominant responses (overlearned or

innate); e.g., turning your head away from a light stimulus (anti-saccade); not peeking at a present for a child

Pay close attention to detail (= focused attention) Persevere in unpleasant tasks

Conscientiousness: Control of implicit processing by the Prefrontal cortexConscientiousness in personality psychology:

Correlated ~.5 with school success Planning for long-term goals Dependable, responsible behavior Linked to functioning of the Prefrontal Cortex Inhibitory connections to Behavioral Approach System.

(BAS linked to reward-oriented behavior, impulsivity, sensation seeking, dominance, sex, etc.)

Slow developing ― Lack of conscientiousness defines immaturity.

Conscientiousness:PFC Control

Sub-cortical desires: Aggression, Sexuality

Ethnocentrism

Conscientiousness: The Other Inhibitory SystemDevelopment of Conscientiousness: Kochanska et al. Increasing coherence between 22 and 33 months of age among a variety of

tasks assessing the ability to inhibit dominant responses waiting for signal before eating snack, not peeking while gift is wrapped, not touching wrapped gift until experimenter returns.

In general, inhibitory ability increased during this age span Girls > Boys Effortful control also predicted ability to modulate anger (tight seat belt

restraint) and ability to modulate joy (reaction to puppet show). This suggests effortful control is linked to control over implicit processing

stemming from affective reactions.

Kochanska, G., Murray, K.T., & Harlan, E. (2000). Effortful control in early childhood: Continuity and change, antecedents, and implications for social development. Developmental Psychology, 36, 220–232.

Effortful Control and aggression: The general aggression modelAnderson and Bushman, 2002.

Prepotent, evolved cues for aggression: Implicit processing: Reflexive Aggression

Aversive experiences produce tendencies for fight or flight in animals and humans. hot temperatures shock-induced pain loud noises foul odors Crowded freeways??Berkowitz, L. (1990). On the formation and regulation of anger and aggression: a cognitive-neoassociationistic

analysis. American Psychologist, 45, 494–503.

Evolutionary Psychology and Aggression: Implicit processing: Reflexive Aggression

Motives for aggression: Status, reputation, honor and sexual jealousy as key motives for aggression.

Adaptive problems “to which aggression might have evolved as a solution” (p. 608): Co-opting resources held by others Defending against attack Inflicting costs on intrasexual rivals Negotiating status and power hierarchies Deterring rivals from future aggression Deterring long-term mates from sexual infidelity Reducing resources expended on unrelated children.

Costs (e.g., possibility of retaliation) built into the module.

Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Human aggression in evolutionary perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 17, 605–619.

Duntley, J. D., & Buss, D. M. (2004). The evolution of evil. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The Social Psychology of Good and Evil. New York: Guilford

Impulsivity as design feature of aggression as an evolved module: Reflexive, subcortical aggression

After being beaten, “I had stone hatred for him, and I righteously couldn’t wait to see the look on his face when I blew him away. As soon as he popped out of the liquor store door, I charged right up to him, rammed the barrel in his chest, and pulled the trigger” (in Duntley & Buss, 2005, p. xxx).

“Effective strategies sometimes require immediate action. Ponderous time delays and real-time extended reflection would result in failure. Stated differently, we propose that “impulsivity” is actually a design feature of certain adaptations that promotes their tactical effectiveness. The fact that they appear to external observers to be products of the lack of judicious reflection may speak to the profound inability of human intuitions to grasp the logic of evolved design, or to our moral judgments that classify certain strategies as good or bad. Speedy, immediate, real-time responses can be the product of adaptive design rather than “mechanical failure.” ” Duntley & Buss, 2004, p. 118

Explicit processing and Aggression

Costs and benefits calculated via explicit prefrontal mechanisms. Explicit assessments of costs/benefits influence

aggression (Tedeschi & Felson, 1994) Aid for victim, retaliation Likelihood of being caught (e.g., DNA

fingerprinting) Penalties at law

PFC is involved in active inhibition of prepotent subcortical impulsive aggression.

PFC Inhibition of sub-cortical aggression impulses: Damasio; Anderson et al. Patients with damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex are

driven by immediate rather than long-term rewards Children with damage in this area have immature, egocentric moral

reasoning and are prone to stealing and aggression. Damasio’s “somatic marker” hypothesis proposes that the deficit stems from the lack of inhibitory emotions normally attached to negative future possibilities.

Patients with prefrontal damage originating in infancy exhibited a general lack of conscientiousness (lack of dependability, inability to plan for the future, proneness to immediate rewards rather than long term goals), impulsive rather than instrumental, goal-directed aggression, and lack of guilt for transgressions against others.

Damasio, A. R. (1994/2000). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Quill (HarperCollins).

Anderson, S. W., Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1999). Impairment of social and moral behavior related to early damage in human prefrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience  2, 1032–1037.

PFC Inhibition of sub-cortical aggression impulses: Raine et al., 1998

Impulsive murderers had relatively lower left and right prefrontal functioning and higher right hemisphere sub-cortical functioning.

Predatory murderers whose crimes involved planning and deliberation had prefrontal functioning that was more equivalent to comparisons, while also having excessively high right sub-cortical activity.

Results “support the hypothesis that emotional, unplanned impulsive murderers are less able to regulate and control aggressive impulses generated from sub-cortical structures due to deficient prefrontal regulation” (p. 319).

PFC Inhibition of sub-cortical aggression impulses: Raine et al., 1998

Both impulsive and predatory murderers have “excessive subcortical activity” (p. 319)—what one might term “modular aggression.”

Predatory murderers are better able to control these impulses stemming from subcortical areas because of adequate prefrontral functioning.

Raine, A., Meloy, J. R., Buhrle, S., Stoddard, J., LaCasse, L., & Muchsbaum, M. S. (1998). Reduced prefrontal and increased subcortical brain functioning assessed using Positron Emission Tomography in predatory and affective murderers. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 16, 319–332.

Control of sexual arousal by the pfc: Beauregard et al., 2001; Journal of Neuroscience 21, RC 165-1-6.

Subjects observe erotic films that brought “rapidly and automatically a marked positive change in the subjective emotional experience of healthy male subjects, change correlated with significant activation of [sub-cortical] limbic brain regions”

Inhibitory condition: subjects instructed to voluntarily inhibit sexual arousal to the erotic stimuli. Subjects “were encouraged to distance themselves from these stimuli, that is, to become a detached observer.”

Inhibition of sexual arousal by the pfc: Beauregard et al., 2001; Journal of Neuroscience 21, RC 165-1-6. Erotic films activated right amygdala, the hypothalamus, and the

right anterior temporal pole [Brodmann area (BA) 38]. Inhibition resulted in no difference between erotic film and neutral film in these areas.

Inhibition associated with activation of right dorsolateral PFC (superior frontal gyrus) and the right Anterior Cingulate Cortex. Subvocal rehearsal component of verbal working memory also involved. Sexual ideology??

Inhibition of sexual arousal by the pfc: Beauregard et al., 2001; Journal of Neuroscience 21, RC 165-1-6 “The normal functioning of the neural network linking the right

dorsolateral PFC, right ACC, right amygdala, right anterior temporal pole, and hypothalamus may constitute a fundamental psychobiological mechanism through which human beings can consciously and willfully self-regulate their emotional responses, using various metacognitive processes. From a phylogenetic perspective, such a circuit may implement one of the most remarkable human faculties that has emerged in the course of human evolution. At both an individual and a collective level, a defect of this neural circuitry . . . may have disastrous psychological and social consequences. Ontologically, the present findings suggest that humans have the capacity to influence the electrochemical dynamics of their brains, by voluntarily changing the nature of the mind processes unfolding in the psychological space.”

Is Conscientiousness Adaptive?

Whether people are aggressive or act on sexual impulses comes under prefrontal control.

People make explicit representations of the context and costs and benefits: Will I go to jail for being aggressive?

People are able to control aggression or sexuality when costs outweigh benefits, as calculated by explicit processing. Example: Aggression: Explicit assessments of costs/benefits influence

aggression Aid for victim (explicitly represented networks of allies) Likelihood of being caught (e.g., DNA evidence) Penalties at law

Conclusion

Conscientiousness/Effortful Control/Active Inhibition is a central system for inhibiting evolved tendencies and other automatic responses in the service of long term goals (e.g., college education and good job) and dealing with exigencies of the real world (e.g., calculating costs and benefits, such as aware of social controls providing penalties for engaging in disinhibited behavior) = Rationality.