The Seven Sins of Evolutionary Psychology - Konrad Lorenz Institute

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Shulamith KreitlerInterpersonally-shared meaning ofbehavior = key wordsLevel 1:Personal meanings of key-words_Level 2: Personal meanings of responses on level 1_Level 3: Personal meanings of responses on level 2Figure 5: The Process of Identifying Themesby means of Meaning Generation.final questionnaire. Examples of themes for successin dieting are acceptance of limitations, and viewingthe world as a safe place. It is important to emphasizethat the beliefs in the questionnaire do not refer inany way to the behavior in question but only to thethemes which represent the underlying meanings.Identifying the themes is followed by constructing aCO questionnaire, which has to be examined for itspsychometric properties, including reliability andvalidity before it is ready for application. Althoughfor every kind of behavior it is necessary to constructa particular CO questionnaire, a single CO questionnairemay predict a broad range of relevant behaviors,e.g., the CO questionnaire of curiosity predicted14 different curiosity behaviors (KREITLER/KREITLER1994b).The availability of the behavioral program is establishedby means of questionnaires, observation,information from others or role-playing.The advantages of the prediction procedure generatedby the CO theory are the following: (a) it hasprovided a great number of significant predictions ofactual behaviors; (b) the predicted behaviors were ofmany different kinds and from different domains;(c) the participants whose behaviors were predictedwere of different ages and intelligence levels, evencognitively challenged individuals; (d) applying theprocedure does not require any special ‘mind-set’,preparation, intention, or even average intelligenceon the part of the participants; (e) the procedure doesnot enable the participants to tailor their responsesso that it would or would not correspond to theirbehaviors because it is impossible to unravel fromthe statements in the CO questionnaire the kind ofinvolved behavior; (f) the procedure may be appliedin regard to any behavior whatsoever provided thatit can be assessed; (g) applying the prediction procedureis straightforward and does not require the involvementof further criteria or constructs or assumptionsor the creation of particular conditions inregard to any behavior.The CO theory has also enabled successful modificationsof behavior, such as rigidity, impulsivity,curiosity and eating disorders (BACHAR/LATZER/KREITLER/BERRY 1999; KREITLER/KREITLER 1988, 1990C,1994B; ZAKAY/BAR-EL/KREITLER 1984). The essentialcomponents of the procedure consist in mobilizingsufficient support for a specific course of action byevoking in the participant beliefs orienting towardthis course of action. The major conditions on whichsuccess of the intervention depend are that theevoked beliefs (a) refer to the themes (viz. underlyingmeanings of the action), (b) refer to all four types ofbeliefs (viz., goals, norms, self and general), and (c)that they have originated in the participant by a processof meaning generation. The procedure for interventionor change of behavior has been standardizedand can be applied in individual or group sessions(KREITLER/KREITLER 1990c). Again, there are no limitationson the types of behaviors or of participantsin regard to which it can be applied.The major theoretical advantages of the CO theoryare that it shows precisely what is the role ofcognition in regard to motivation and behavior. Theassumption that attitudes, values, informations andopinions are important in regard to behavior isdeeply rooted in Western culture and underlies education,persuasion and dissemination of informationthrough the media and otherwise. However, alarge body of studies in the last century showed thatattitudes were not related to behavior (e.g., COREY1937; LAPIERE 1934). This evidence posed a seriousproblem for behavioral scientists (KREITLER 2002).The CO theory provided a plausible and operationalaccount of the role of cognition in regard to motivationand behavior. Thereby, the CO theory also clarifiedthe role of several additional basic concepts inregard to motivation and behavior, mainly the self,values and norms, and attributions, causal and others.Evolutionary Aspects of the CO TheoryThe evolutionary aspects of the CO theory will bediscussed in two complementary forms. The firstwill be in terms of general developmental trends,the second—in terms of the stages interveningbetween input and output in line with the CO theory(see section “The CO theory: How does it function?Major theoretical stages”). In both cases thediscussion will be based partly on extrapolationsfrom observations on ontogenetic development,and partly on information about animal behavior.However it may be, the purpose is merely to traceEvolution and Cognition ❘ 88 ❘ 2001, Vol. 7, No. 1
An Evolutionary Perspective on Cognitive Orientationthe blueprint of evolutionary aspects involved inthe cognitive guidance of behavior.General developmental trends. The first and possiblythe most important trend is the differentiationof action and motivation. This differentiation doesnot seem to exist at the lowest evolutionary levels.On these levels we find actions, which may beprompted by inner or outer states that are not differentiatedfrom the action and cannot be identified assuch. As stated most precisely by WIMMER (1995,p43), “information about [homeostatic] disturbanceand motoric pattern are combined in a unit whichbecomes segregated at higher levels of organization,e.g., taxis behavior”. The differentiation occurswhen we first obtain some kind of representation ofthe inner or outer stimulus. This constitutes the basisfor the development of motivation in later phases,as distinct from action. The two arms—of motivationand of action—undergo different transformationsand development in the course of evolution.The development of motivation depends largely onmeaning, whereas the development of action dependslargely on structures.Accordingly, the second basic trend is the evolutionof meaning. This evolution takes differentforms, some of which overlap, whereas others occurin a sequence. The development is partly structuraland partly dynamic. The structural developmentconsists basically in shaping the major outlines ofthe meaning system. This entails differentiating thecontents of the meaning values into subsets whichwe call meaning dimensions, differentiating the relationsof the contents to the referents in terms ofdirectness, generality, positivity and the nature ofthe relation (propositional, normative, desired), andmoving from the nonverbal actional means of expressionto the use of diversified nonverbal and verbalmeans of expressing meaning values and meaningunits. On higher levels, the whole system splitsinto two major branches of the interpersonallysharedmeaning and the subjective–personal meaning,which may intertwine and interact to differentdegrees. The more dynamic development consists inmoving from meaning values to meaning units(each of which includes a meaning value centeredaround a referent), from meaning action to meaninggeneration, and from surface or label meaning toelaboration of the deeper underlying meanings. Thelatter development brings aboutan increasing involvementof personal–subjective meaning in additionto the interpersonally-shared one which dominatesthe surface-label meaning.A special line of development is taken by meaningunits. It will be mentioned because it is of particularimportance for the cognitive guidance of motivation.This line leads from meaning units to beliefs.Both meaning units and beliefs share the basic structureof a referent related to a meaning value. However,they differ in function. Meaning unit is a conceptfrom the domain of meaning and its functionis the expression or communication of meaning perse. In contrast, belief is a concept from the domainof action or behavior, and its function is to expressor communicate some cognitive contents—e.g., astatement, a view, an attitude, an opinion, an information,a value, an expectation etc.—with behavioralimplications.The primary meaning unit is a belief which statesa fact, namely, the relation of the meaning value tothe referent is factual, existential. Hence, it could beeither a belief about self or a general belief. It is difficultto decide which one was the first. But in viewof the primary focusing on oneself it seems likelythat the belief about self preceded the general belief.Be it as it may, each of these primary units split toform by differentiation two distinct varieties. Thus,the belief about self differentiated into a belief aboutgoals and a belief about self, both of which share the‘I’ as a referent and differ only in the kind of relationbetween the meaning value and the referent (viz.desired vs. factual, respectively). Similarly, the generalbelief differentiated into a belief about normsand a general belief, both of which share the non–Ias a referent and differ only in the kind of relationbetween the meaning value and the referent (viz.normative/desirable vs. factual, respectively). As aresult, four types of beliefs emerged.Complementing the evolution of meaning is thethird trend, which refers to the evolution of action.The major characteristics of evolution in this spherehave been extensively studied. One characteristicconsists in increased variety of action units. On thelower evolutionary levels we find genetically and innatelydetermined units of action that are rigidly enactedin a specific manner. New units are added tothe repertory which modify the innately given actionalunits or combine with them in different waysand thus form, for example, conditioned responsesand habits. Further, the units of action which initiallymay be bound to specific inputs or situationsbecome gradually free of such constraints, and maybe used in a variety of contexts, or for the attainmentof purposes completely divorced from those withwhich they may have been related when acquired.Another characteristic development consists in in-Evolution and Cognition ❘ 89 ❘ 2001, Vol. 7, No. 1
Page 1 and 2:
ContentsEvolutionary Psychology: An
Page 3 and 4:
A Synopsis of “The Sevens Sins of
Page 5 and 6:
A Synopsis of “The Sevens Sins of
Page 7 and 8:
Minding the Brainon the basis of re
Page 9 and 10:
Minding the Brainamong bona fide et
Page 11 and 12:
Minding the Brainin their language
Page 13 and 14:
Minding the BrainReferencesBateson,
Page 15:
“La plus ça change…”simple c
Page 18 and 19:
Linda MealeyReferencesAlcock, J. (1
Page 20 and 21:
Carlos StegmannComments on Jaak Pan
Page 22 and 23:
Carlos Stegmanntive mechanisms. Mos
Page 24 and 25:
Carlos StegmannReferencesCarnap, R.
Page 26 and 27:
Russell Gardner, Jr.these subcortic
Page 28 and 29:
Russell Gardner, Jr.The enormous sw
Page 30 and 31:
Russell Gardner, Jr.ReferencesBakke
Page 32 and 33:
Gerhard Meisenbergmodular systems a
Page 34 and 35:
Gerhard Meisenbergstraight into the
Page 36 and 37:
Gerhard Meisenbergcan assume new fu
Page 38 and 39: Gerhard MeisenbergNishimura, H./Has
Page 40 and 41: Ian Pitchfordother biological resou
Page 42 and 43: Ian Pitchfordappreciation that the
Page 44 and 45: Ian Pitchfordin developmental psych
Page 46 and 47: Scott AtranThe Case for Modularity:
Page 48 and 49: Scott Atranvant domain. For example
Page 50 and 51: Scott Atranpalm lines. From the fac
Page 52 and 53: Scott Atrangroups of species: snake
Page 54 and 55: Scott AtranLittle by little, biolog
Page 56 and 57: Jaak Panksepp and Jules B. Panksepp
Page 82 and 83: Shulamith Kreitlertion—he said on
Page 84 and 85: Shulamith Kreitlercognitive process
Page 86 and 87: Shulamith KreitlerBeliefs about Sel
Page 90 and 91: Shulamith Kreitlercreased complexit
Page 92 and 93: Shulamith Kreitlerof plasticity. At
Page 94 and 95: Shulamith Kreitlerdevelopmental lev
Page 96 and 97: Shulamith KreitlerKreitler, S./Chem
Page 98 and 99: Chris MacDonaldEvolutionary EthicsV
Page 100 and 101: Chris MacDonaldand… the goods of
Page 102 and 103: Chris MacDonaldMexyzYoux y z0 1 30
Page 104 and 105: Chris MacDonaldmore generally) come
Page 106 and 107: Zusammenfassungen der Artikelin deu
Page 108 and 109: Zusammenfassungen der Artikel in de
Page 110 and 111: Zusammenfassungen der Artikel in de
show all

The Seven Sins of Evolutionary Psychology - Konrad Lorenz Institute

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?