A general account of selection: biology, immunology, and behavior.

Authors frequently refer to gene-based selection in biological evolution, the reaction of the immune system to antigens, and operant learning as exemplifying selection processes in the same sense of this term. However, as obvious as this claim may seem on the surface, setting out an account of "selection" that is general enough to incorporate all three of these processes without becoming so general as to be vacuous is far from easy. In this target article, we set out such a general account of selection to see how well it accommodates these very different sorts of selection. The three fundamental elements of this account are replication, variation, and environmental interaction. For selection to occur, these three processes must be related in a very specific way. In particular, replication must alternate with environmental interaction so that any changes that occur in replication are passed on differentially because of environmental interaction. One of the main differences among the three sorts of selection that we investigate concerns the role of organisms. In traditional biological evolution, organisms play a central role with respect to environmental interaction. Although environmental interaction can occur at other levels of the organizational hierarchy, organisms are the primary focus of environmental interaction. In the functioning of the immune system, organisms function as containers. The interactions that result in selection of antibodies during a lifetime are between entities (antibodies and antigens) contained within the organism. Resulting changes in the immune system of one organism are not passed on to later organisms. Nor are changes in operant behavior resulting from behavioral selection passed on to later organisms. But operant behavior is not contained in the organism because most of the interactions that lead to differential replication include parts of the world outside the organism. Changes in the organism's nervous system are the effects of those interactions. The role of genes also varies in these three systems. Biological evolution is gene-based (i.e., genes are the primary replicators). Genes play very different roles in operant behavior and the immune system. However, in all three systems, iteration is central. All three selection processes are also incredibly wasteful and inefficient. They can generate complexity and novelty primarily because they are so wasteful and inefficient.     

CUI BONO? A REVIEW OF BREAKING THE SPELL: RELIGION AS A NATURAL PHENOMENON BY DANIEL C. DENNETT

The three requirements for a Darwinian evolutionary process are replication, variation and selection. Dennett (2006) discusses various theories of how these three processes, especially selection, may have operated in the evolution of religion. He believes that the origins of religion, like the origins of language and music, may be approached scientifically. He hopes that such investigations will open a dialog between science and religion leading to moderation of current religious extremism. One problem with Dennett's program, illustrating the difficulty of breaking away from creationist thinking, is Dennett's own failure to consider how Darwinian methods may be used to study evolution of behavioral patterns over the lifetime of individual organisms.     

A step towards ending the isolation of behavior analysis: A common language with evolutionary science

In spite of repeated efforts to explain itself to a wider audience, behavior analysis remains a largely misunderstood and isolated discipline. In this article we argue that this situation is in part due to the terms we use in our technical discussions. In particular, reinforcement and punishment, with their vernacular associations of reward and retribution, are a source of much misunderstanding. Although contemporary thinking within behavior analysis holds that reinforcement and punishment are Darwinian processes whereby behavioral variants are selected and deselected by their consequences, the continued use of the terms reinforcement and punishment to account for behavioral evolution obscures this fact. To clarify and simplify matters, we propose replacing the terms reinforcement and punishment with selection and deselection, respectively. These changes would provide a terminological meeting point with other selectionist sciences, thereby increasing the likelihood that behavior analysis will contribute to Darwinian science.     

正强化和负强化:概念、争议与神经机制

1975年,Michael首次正式提出应放弃"正强化"和"负强化"术语的使用,引起对"正强化和负强化是否本质上具有区别"这一问题的关注和争议。正负强化究竟本质上是否有区分、如何区分、以及区分它们的意义等问题,得到了众多行为心理学家的深入探讨。多数学者再度阐明正强化和负强化具有不同的心理机制,加以区分具有重要应用意义,主张沿用对它们的区分。最近,对正负强化神经机制的研究取得突破性进展,进一步揭示它们具有截然不同的神经相关过程。我们建议,分析强化作用进行时,机体是否在环境条件作用下已经偏离了基础、正常的心理稳态,有助于规范理解强化物启动的是正还是负强化的神经过程。     

Allocation of complex, sequential operants on multiple and concurrent schedules of reinforcement

Pigeons could produce food by pecking exactly four times on each of two keys, in any order. In the first experiment, these response sequences were reinforced on a series of multiple schedules of variable-interval reinforcement. In the second experiment, these response sequences were reinforced on a series of concurrent schedules of reinforcement. In both experiments, highly stereotyped response sequences developed. If these response sequences were treated as individual responses, the resulting data conformed to what is typically reported in studies of multiple and concurrent schedules involving individual responses. For example, behavioral contrast was observed with the multiple schedules, and matching was observed with the concurrent schedules. However, schedule manipulation had no effect on within-sequence characteristics of responses like accuracy, stereotypy, or rate. These data constitute further evidence that response sequences can become functional behavioral units.     

Behavioral variability in an evolutionary theory of behavior dynamics

McDowell’s evolutionary theory of behavior dynamics (McDowell, 2004) instantiates populations of behaviors (abstractly represented by integers) that evolve under the selection pressure of the environment in the form of positive reinforcement. Each generation gives rise to the next via low‐level Darwinian processes of selection, recombination, and mutation. The emergent patterns can be analyzed and compared to those produced by biological organisms. The purpose of this project was to explore the effects of high mutation rates on behavioral variability in environments that arranged different reinforcer rates and magnitudes. Behavioral variability increased with the rate of mutation. High reinforcer rates and magnitudes reduced these effects; low reinforcer rates and magnitudes augmented them. These results are in agreement with live‐organism research on behavioral variability. Various combinations of mutation rates, reinforcer rates, and reinforcer magnitudes produced similar high‐level outcomes (equifinality). These findings suggest that the independent variables that describe an experimental condition interact; that is, they do not influence behavior independently. These conclusions have implications for the interpretation of high levels of variability, mathematical undermatching, and the matching theory. The last part of the discussion centers on a potential biological counterpart for the rate of mutation, namely spontaneous fluctuations in the brain's default mode network.     

人类大脑、认知与行为进化的整合模型

物种进化的历史进程中,大脑、认知与行为系统的进化机能利于有机体控制社会、生物与自然资源,而有机体所控制的各种资源又会影响自身的生存与繁衍。社会、生物与自然资源可以相对稳定,也可以变化不定。资源的稳定变化所传递的信息会引起大脑、认知以及行为系统做出模块化的自主反应。资源的稳定变化利于人类整合朴素心理学、朴素生物学与朴素物理学,而资源的变化不定所传达出的信息会引起认知与行为系统有意识地进行自上而下的外显行为反应。人类外显行为反应系统的进化导致人类出现自我意识,并具有探索性解决问题的能力。朴素心理能力、意识与问题解决能力可以整合为动机－控制理论     

BEHAVIOR, REINFORCEMENT AND UTILITY

The standard economic assumption about human behavior is that it optimizes overall utility. But in many controlled experiments on behavioral allocation, it has been found that organisms allocate their behavior so as to earn equal average rates of reinforcement from all alternatives. Equalizing average rates of reinforcement is a principle of allocation that generically violates the assumption of optimality.     

Social reinforcement in psychotherapy

Conditioning operates importantly in psychotherapy through a number of major mechanisms, one of the least recognized of which is direct behavioral shaping through social reinforcement and punishment. The case presented illustrates the operation of this mechanism in rather pure culture. The case was ideally suited to the use of behavioral shaping as a therapeutic technique. The patient, who had been unable to work or comfortably leave home for 17 years, was treated successfully in a total of approximately ten hours of patient-therapist contact. A four-year follow-up is presented, together with discussion of the importance of this behavioral dimension as it operates generally in psychotherapy.     

Behavioral contrast of time allocation

Pigeons' standing on a platform produced food reinforcement according to two-component multiple schedules in which either both components consisted of the same variable-interval schedule or one of these was replaced with a component without reinforcement (extinction). The components of the multiple schedule alternated every 30 sec, and were signalled by changes in the color of diffuse overhead illumination. Changing the schedule of one of the components to extinction increased the percentage of time spent on the platform during the unchanged component (behavioral contrast). This result casts doubt on accounts that attribute behavioral contrast to variations in the rate of noninstrumental elicited responses.     

Truth and Tension in Science and Religion

While evolution deserves theological support and inclusion in schools, the consensus views, Darwinian or neo-Darwinian evolution, present problems. Darwin presented two arguments: 1) that evolution, descent with modification, has occurred, and 2) that its “cause” is natural selection, the focus of neo-Darwinism. However, the products of natural selection, adaptations, are often not congruent with the lineages produced by evolution and its demonstrated effects are within species. The difficulty of using natural selection to explain evolution is used by proponents of Intelligent Design (ID) to denigrate evolution and to argue for the inclusion of ID in biology classes. However, the force of the arguments in favor of ID disappear when evolution is viewed as an informational phenomenon. Evolution, like development, is a system of increasing complexity, and emergence the inevitable outcome of the transformation of matter whereby the information in DNA is expressed that accompanies energy dynamics. Evolution is witnessed by studies in comparative biology that reveal groups of related organisms and homologies, both the result of descent with modification.     

Modulation of the conflict monitoring intensity: The role of aversive reinforcement,cognitive demand,and trait-BIS

According to Botvinick’s (2007) integrative account, conflict monitoring is aversive because individuals anticipate cognitive demand, whereas the revised reinforcement sensitivity theory (rRST) predicts that conflict processing is aversive because individuals anticipate aversive reinforcement of erroneous responses. Because these accounts give different reasons for the aversive aspects of conflict, we manipulated cognitive demand and the aversive reinforcement as a consequence of wrong choices in a go/no-go task. Thereby, we also aimed to investigate whether individual differences in conflict sensitivity (i.e., in trait anxiety, linked to high sensitivity of the behavioral inhibition system [trait-BIS]) represent the effects of aversive reinforcement and cognitive demand in conflict tasks. We expected that these manipulations would have effects on the frontal N2 component representing activity of the anterior cingulate cortex. Moreover, higher-trait-BIS individuals should be more sensitive than lower-trait-BIS individuals to aversive effects in conflict situations, resulting in a more negative frontal N2 for higher-trait-BIS individuals. In Study 1, with N = 104 students, and Study 2, with N = 47 students, aversive reinforcement was manipulated in three levels (within-subjects factor) and cognitive demand in two levels (between-subjects factor). The behavioral findings from the go/no-go task with noncounterbalanced reinforcement levels (Study 1) could be widely replicated in a task with counterbalanced reinforcement levels (Study 2). The frontal mean no-go N2 amplitude and the frontal no-go N2 dipole captured predicted reinforcement-related variations of conflict monitoring, indicating that the anticipation of aversive reinforcement induces variations in conflict monitoring intensity in frontal brain areas. The aversive nature of conflict was underlined by the more pronounced conflict monitoring in higher- than in lower-trait-BIS individuals.     

The Spirit(s) of Science: Paradoxical Positivism as Religious Discourse among Spiritualists

This article examines a narrative dilemma that popular texts on evolution face. On the one hand, popular science tends to privilege linear and culturally familiar narrative structures, as previous studies of popularization have often emphasized. On the other hand, however, the Darwinian idea of natural selection resists linear narration, as narrative theorist H. Porter Abbott has argued. This resistance arises from the fact that evolution by natural selection lacks proper narrative entities and narrative events and that it relies on two parallel narrative levels, the levels of species and organism. This paper explores how two popular science books on evolution negotiate this narrative dilemma by introducing a third narrative level. Both texts appropriate characteristics from the narrative levels of species and organism and project them on molecular and minute scales by portraying evolution as a micro-narrative that takes place in chromosomes, genes, cells and microscopic details of human organs. While this textual strategy produces a coherent and compelling narrative that for the most part succeeds in masking the structural gap between the narrative levels of species and organism, it also risks naturalizing cultural imagery. In particular, this micro-narrative tends to represent popular gender ideologies as biological truths embedded in molecular processes within our bodies.     

The Fragility of Evolution: Part One

This article argues for a shift in evolutionary metaphor-from fitness and the elimination of the less fit to fragility and passage through fragile periods of change. Childhood, for example, can be viewed as state of protected weakness, allowing time for more neural development, learning, and play. Similarly, evolutionary change can be released precisely when competitive pressure is relaxed. The fragility of evolution in time extends to several biological domains. The genetic system exhibits a surprising fluidity, whether from mobile genetic elements or hypermutation due to stress. Through gene duplication, organisms build up redundancy, which can more readily diverge into novelty. With endo-symbiosis one organism becomes incorporated into another, merging genomes, membranes, and metabolisms. As a result novel structures and genetic restructuring occur, making for profound evolutionary change. In a sexual life cycle, gametes within a species group fuse and amplify subtle variation. Hybridization, or unions between atypical sexual partners, can cause instant speciation and an instability that leads to more evolution. With development organisms go through rapid morphological change and sensitive transition phases. Importantly, dissociation of developmental modules in both temporal and spatial ways allow for evolutionary novelty to emerge. Several lines of evidence lead to the hypothesis that the organism's inner matrix can respond to stresses and help shape a fluid genome. In a second article, three more biological domains will be examined, in which organisms and environment more obviously interpenetrate: the remarkably plastic neural/behavioral system, novel synergisms between organisms, and the multiple, complex dynamics of ecosystems-all of which help to generate life's outstanding diversity. Last, the protection of fragile human populations will be discussed.     

Précis of Evolution in Four Dimensions

In his theory of evolution, Darwin recognized that the conditions of life play a role in the generation of hereditary variations, as well as in their selection. However, as evolutionary theory was developed further, heredity became identified with genetics, and variation was seen in terms of combinations of randomly generated gene mutations. We argue that this view is now changing, because it is clear that a notion of hereditary variation that is based solely on randomly varying genes that are unaffected by developmental conditions is an inadequate basis for evolutionary theories. Such a view not only fails to provide satisfying explanations of many evolutionary phenomena, it also makes assumptions that are not consistent with the data that are emerging from disciplines ranging from molecular biology to cultural studies. These data show that the genome is far more responsive to the environment than previously thought, and that not all transmissible variation is underlain by genetic differences. In Evolution in Four Dimensions (2005) we identify four types of inheritance (genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and symbol-based), each of which can provide variations on which natural selection will act. Some of these variations arise in response to developmental conditions, so there are Lamarckian aspects to evolution. We argue that a better insight into evolutionary processes will result from recognizing that transmitted variations that are not based on DNA differences have played a role. This is particularly true for understanding the evolution of human behavior, where all four dimensions of heredity have been important.     

On The Reality of Tooth Fairies: A Review of The God Delusion

In The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins reviews the evidence for and against God. After considering arguments for a divine power, he says the main current one is that the characteristics of living creatures must be attributed to an all-powerful designer. Design is the only plausible account, because the excellent fit between each plant and animal and its environment could not possibly have appeared in one stroke by pure chance. Dawkins agrees that randomness could not have done the job, but he says that a designer is equally unlikely. The only viable explanation is evolution by natural selection, a process that operates without plan or design. He then turns to the adaptive value of religious belief. After failing to find any, he proposes that belief in divinities is the by-product of a powerful tendency to learn from others, an adaptive strategy produced by natural selection. Adults and other influential figures teach children many useful things, but they also train them to worship deities. Religious devotion is established through education, and it is maintained over generations by the social learning processes underlying all instances of cultural evolution. Dawkins'' arguments together with other problems encountered in describing evolutionary processes highlight the importance of social learning. His discussion leads the reviewer to assert that only by knowing the mechanisms of social learning is it possible to understand how biological and cultural evolution interact to produce life as we find it.     

THE PRENATAL ORIGINS OF BEHAVIORAL ORGANIZATION

Recognition that organisms have a developmental history, exhibit behavior that is uniquely suited to or constrained by features of their immediate environment, and adapt to new environments is central to current psychobiological thought. Unfortunately, these concepts have in the past been restricted largely to the study of postnatal behavioral development. However, recent extension of these concepts to the fetus as an active and interactive organism that resides within a specialized, intrauterine niche is proving to be a profitable approach toward understanding the origins of behavioral organization during development.     

Mother knows best: Epigenetic inheritance,maternal effects,and the evolution of human intelligence

Contemporary evolution biology has recognized the role of development in evolution. Evolutionarily oriented psychologists have similarly recognized the role that behavioral plasticity, particularly early in development, may have had on the evolution of species, harking back to the ideas of Baldwin (the Baldwin effect). Epigenetic theories of development provide a framework for interpreting the interacting roles of experience and genetics both in ontogeny and phylogeny and the transmission of nongenetic characteristics across generations (epigenetic inheritance). In mammals in particular, differences in maternal behavior may contribute substantially to epigenetic inheritance. Changes in early rearing experiences may have been especially important for humans’ ancestors, leading to the acquisition of symbolic functioning. Such representational changes were most influential in social cognition and led to new selective pressures furthering the evolution of symbolic abilities. Research with great apes is presented to suggest that our last common ancestor with chimpanzees likely had the behavioral plasticity and sociocognitive precursors to modify their behavior and cognition via maternal effects toward a more human-like social intelligence.