Cognitive Mapping and the Origin of Language and Mind

Previous articleNext article No AccessNew Biological BooksOrigins of the Modern Mind. Three Stages in the Evolution of Culture and Cognition. Merlin Donald Harry J. JerisonHarry J. Jerison Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Quarterly Review of Biology Volume 67, Number 4Dec., 1992 Published in association with Stony Brook University Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/417877 Views: 3Total views on this site Citations: 34Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1992 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Merlin Donald Précis of Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of culture and cognition, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 737–748.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032647Michael A. Arbib From cooperative computation to man/machine symbiosis, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 748–749.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032659Derek Bickerton Putting cognitive carts before linguistic horses, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 749–750.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032660C. Loring Brace “Pop science” versus understanding the emergence of the modern mind, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 750–751.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032672Bruce Bridgeman, Margarita Azmitia Mimetic culture and modern sports: A synthesis, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 751–752.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032684Philip G. Chase Archaeology and the cognitive sciences in the study of human evolution, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 752–753.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032696Andy Clark Symbolic invention: The missing (computational) link?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 753–754.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032702Thomas L. Clarke A natural history of the mind: A guide for cognitive science, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 754–755.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032714Alan Costall The place of cognition in human evolution, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 755–755.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032726Vilmos Csányi Human evolution: Emergence of the group-self, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 755–756.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032738Jeffrey Cynx, Stephen J. Clark Ethological foxes and cognitive hedgehogs, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 756–757.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0003274XJ. B. Deregowski What about pictures?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 757–758.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032751R. I. M. Dunbar The modern mind: Its missing parts?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 758–759.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032763Jerome A. Feldman From mimesis to synthesis, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 759–759.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032775James H. Fetzer Evolution needs a modern theory of the mind, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 759–760.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032787Liane M. Gabora Cultural transitions occur when mind parasites learn new tricks, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 760–761.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032799K. J. Gilhooly Working memory and its extensions, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 761–762.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032805John Halverson Mythos and logos, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 762–762.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032817P. J. Hampson From mimetic to mythic culture: Stimulus equivalence effects and prelinguistic cognition, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 763–763.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032829Harry J. Jerison The evolved mind, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 763–764.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032830Leonard D. Katz The gradual evolution of enhanced control by plans: A view from below, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 764–765.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032842Aarre Laakso Language equals mimesis plus speech, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 765–766.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032854Rudi Lutz Lessons from evolution for artificial intelligence?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 766–766.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032866Alexander Marshack Correct data base: Wrong model?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 767–768.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032878Robert W. Mitchell, H. Lyn Miles Apes have mimetic culture, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 768–768.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0003288XH. C. Plotkin Hunting memes, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 768–769.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032891Jocelyn Penny Small Memory, text and the Greek Revolution, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 769–770.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032908Evan Thompson Language, thought and consciousness in the modern mind, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 770–771.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0003291XMichael Tomasello It's imitation, not mimesis, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 771–772.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032921Jacques Vauclair, Joël Fagot Can a Saussurian ape be endowed with episodic memory only?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 772–773.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032933Christopher Wills Stages versus continuity, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 773–773.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032945Thomas Wynn Archaeological evidence for mimetic mind and culture, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 774–774.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032957Jiajie Zhang External representation: An issue for cognition, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 774–775.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032969Merlin Donald On the evolution of representational capacities, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, no.44 (Feb 2010): 775–791.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032970

Learning motivated by electrical stimulation of the brain.

The term `complexity' is often found in the behavioural and cognitive sciences. This paper compares the common-sense usage of the world with attempts by information theorists to provide a formal definition. The concepts of randomness, predictability, organization and complexity are reviewed and we advocate that a distinction be made between traditional `algorithmic' and a more biologically relevant `organizational' complexity. We develop the formal properties of the latter with reference to hierarchies of explanation. The utility of both measures of complexity is discussed and examples of practical application given. We discuss relationships between complexity of environment, cognition, behaviour and brain, outline a possible metacognitive function for perception of complexity, and consider the implications for evolutionary psychology of the special nature of social complexity.

Removing the stigma of medication for opioid use disorder

Previous articleNext article No AccessResearch ConclusionsRhodesian Man and the Evolution of SpeechDavid B. BurrDavid B. Burr Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Current Anthropology Volume 17, Number 4Dec., 1976 Sponsored by the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/201824 Views: 2Total views on this site Citations: 26Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1976 The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological ResearchPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Wendy K. Wilkins, Jennie Wakefield Brains evolution and neurolinguistic preconditions, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 161–182.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00037924Derek Bickerton Finding the true place of Homo habilis in language evolution, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 182–183.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00037936David J. Bryant Is preadaptation for language a necessary assumption?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 183–184.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00037948A. Charles Catania Single words, multiple words, and the functions of language, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 184–185.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0003795XMichael C. Corballis Lending a hand, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 185–186.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00037961William O. Dingwall Complex behaviors: Evolution and the brain, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 186–188.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00037973Merlin Donald Neurolinguistic models and fossil reconstructions, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 188–189.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00037985Roslyn Holly Fitch, Paula Tallal A case for auditory temporal processing as an evolutionary precursor to speech processing and language function, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 189–189.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00037997Kathleen R. Gibson Solving the language origins puzzle: Collecting and assembling all pertinent pieces, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 189–190.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038000Marc D. Hauser, Nathan D. Wolfea Human language: Are nonhuman precursors lacking?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 190–191.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038012Ralph L. Holloway Evidence for POT expansion in early Homo : A pretty theory with ugly (or no) paleoneurological facts, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 191–193.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038024James R. Hurford, Simon Kirby Neural preconditions for proto-language, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 193–194.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038036Bob Jacobs, John M. Horner Language as a multimodal sensory enhancement system, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 194–195.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038048Harry J. Jerison Issues in neo- and paleoneurology of language, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 195–196.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0003805XJustin Leiber Coming of age in Olduvai and the Zaire rain forest, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 196–197.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038061Philip Lieberman Manual versus speech motor control and the evolution of language, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 197–198.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038073Jo Liska Semiogenesis as a continuous, not a discrete, phenomenon, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 198–199.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038085A. Maryanski The hominid tool-language connection: Some missing evolutionary links?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 199–200.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038097Robert W. Mitchell, H. Lyn Miles Apes and language: Human uniqueness again?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 200–201.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038103Frederick J. Newmeyer Conceptual structure and syntax, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 202–202.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038115James Steele Stone tools and conceptual structure, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 202–203.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038127Stephen F. Walker Bartering old stone tools: When did communicative ability and conceptual structure begin to interact?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 203–204.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038139Elizabeth Whitcombe Palaeoneurology of language: Grounds for scepticism, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 204–205.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038140Wendy K. Wilkins, Jennie Wakefield Issues and nonissues in the origins of language, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, no.11 (Feb 2010): 205–226.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038152L. A. Schepartz Language and modern human origins, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 36, no.S17S17 (Jan 1993): 91–126.https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330360607HORST D. STEKLIS, MICHAEL J. RALEIGH Requisites for Language: Interspecific and Evolutionary Aspects, (Jan 1979): 283–314.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-665650-3.50016-5

Previous articleNext article No AccessMagic and Witchcraft: An Interpretation from Dissonance TheoryTheodore Rosenthal, and Bernard J. SiegelTheodore Rosenthal Search for more articles by this author , and Bernard J. Siegel Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 15, Number 2Summer, 1959 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.15.2.3628803 Views: 10Total views on this site Citations: 32Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in the Southwestern Journal of Anthropology (1945-1972), which is continued by the Journal of Anthropological Research (1973-present). PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Thi An Tran From Dichotomy to Multipolarity: A Case Study of the Four Ladyship Saints Worshipping Practices in Vietnam, (Oct 2021): 167–187.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5055-0_10Patrick Kwaku Ofori, David Tod, David Lavallee An exploratory investigation of superstitious behaviours, coping, control strategies, and personal control in Ghanaian and British student-athletes, International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 16, no.11 (Feb 2016): 3–19.https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2016.1142460Richard Sosis, W. Penn Handwerker Psalms and Coping with Uncertainty: Religious Israeli Women's Responses to the 2006 Lebanon War, American Anthropologist 113, no.11 (Feb 2011): 40–55.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1433.2010.01305.xJules J. Wanderer, George Rivera, Jr. Black magic beliefs and white magic practices: The common structure of intimacy, tradition, and power, The Social Science Journal 23, no.44 (Dec 2019): 419–430.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0362-3319(86)80016-7Nicholas P. Spanos Hypnotic behavior: A social-psychological interpretation of amnesia, analgesia, and “trance logic”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 449–467.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046537John O. Beahrs The “special-process” controversy: What is at issue?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 467–468.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046549Patricia G. Bowers Understanding reports of nonvolition, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 469–470.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046562Nathan Brody Cognitively induced analgesia and semantic dissociation, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 470–470.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046574William E. Edmonston Hypnosis and social suggestibility, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 470–471.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046586Frederick J. Evans Hypnosis and behavioral compliance: Is the cup half-empty or half-full?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 471–473.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046598Kenneth R. Graham Explaining “virtuoso” hypnotic performance: Social psychology or experiential skill?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 473–474.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046604John F. Kihlstrom Strong inferences about hypnosis, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 474–475.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046616Irving Kirsch Role playing versus response expectancy as explanations of hypnotic behavior, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 475–476.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046628Peter L. N. Naish Hypnosis: Towards a rational explanation of irrational behaviour, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 476–477.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0004663XMartin T. Orne, David F. Dinges, Emily Carota Orne Hypnotic experience: A cognitive social-psychological reality, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 477–478.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046641Campbell Perry, Jean-Roch Laurence Social and psychological influences on hypnotic behavior, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 478–479.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046653Robert Rosenthal Nonsignificant relationships as scientific evidence, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 479–481.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046665Ted L. Rosenthal Hypnotic phenomena: Who really sees the emperor's new clothes?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 481–481.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046677John Sabini, Debra A. Kossman What grandma thinks about hypnosis, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 481–482.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046689Richard St. Jean Hypnosis: Artichoke or onion?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 482–482.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046690Peter W. Sheehan Theories of hypnosis – useful or necessary paths to truth?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 483–483.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046707David Spiegel Painstaking reminders of forgotten trance logic, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 484–485.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046719Dennis C. Turk, Thomas E. Rudy Hypnotic behavior dissected or … pulling the wings off butterflies, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 485–485.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046720Geoffrey Underwood Using simulations to disprove hypnosis amnesia? Forget it, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 485–486.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046732Graham F. Wagstaff State versus nonstate paradigms of hypnosis: A real or a false dichotomy?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 486–487.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046744Edwin A. Weinstein Attentional capacities have neurological basis, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 487–488.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00046756Nicholas P. Spanos More on the social psychology of hypnotic responding, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9, no.33 (Feb 2010): 489–502.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0004677XThomas Frank Lazar Indigenous Curing Patterns in a Samoan Migrant Community, Oceania 55, no.44 (Feb 2015): 288–302.https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1834-4461.1985.tb02094.xTED L. ROSENTHAL Social Cueing Processes, (Jan 1980): 111–146.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-535610-7.50009-8 References, (Jan 1978): 287–320.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-596750-1.50010-1DAVID LANDY role adaptation: traditional curers under the impact of Western medicine 1, American Ethnologist 1, no.11 (Oct 2009): 103–127.https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.1974.1.1.02a00060Ted L. Rosenthal, Ronald W. Henderson, Arline Hobson, Maure Hurt Social Strata and Perception of Magical and Folk-Medical Child-Care Practices, The Journal of Social Psychology 77, no.11 (Feb 1969): 3–13.https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1969.9919842

ABSTRACTThe extended evolutionary synthesis (EES) is a school of thought that maintains that genetic determination and natural selection are over‐emphasized in the study of evolution at the expense of non‐genetic inheritance and processes of evolution beyond selection. Its proponents call for the de‐emphasis of genetics and the adoption of a broader model of inheritance that includes cultural and epigenetic transgenerational effects and strong adaptive phenotypic plasticity. Presenting itself as a radical alternative to what it claims is a rigid and ossified theoretical orthodoxy, the EES has lately gained considerable traction among scholars of human evolution, and a distinct sub‐branch of the EES unique to the biological anthropological study of human evolution has emerged (the EES in human evolution). To date, however, no direct comparison between the EES in human evolution and other contemporary evolutionary approaches has been attempted to evaluate whether the EES in human evolution affords researchers an edge in articulating good questions and structuring research programs to answer them. After reviewing the landscape of evolutionary theory, we evaluate whether the EES in human evolution is capable of delivering the processually pluralistic vision of evolution it has long promised and whether it brings something that the decades‐long ongoing synthesis (OS) of evolutionary theory since the modern synthesis does not. We then conduct a head‐to‐head comparison to evaluate the relative explanatory efficacy of the EES and our preferred OS theoretical framework on several issues of human morphological evolution. We demonstrate that evolutionary perspectives as drawn from the OS have a much more clarifying effect on the investigation of human evolution than their EES‐based competitor. Far from being a radical extension of evolutionary thought, the EES in human evolution offers little more than another idiom in which to tell adaptationist stories and triumphalist narratives of the ascent of humanity. Theory from the OS opens up new horizons of possible investigation of human evolution in a uniquely processually pluralistic and rigorous framework.

This book proposes a new theory of the origins of human language ability and presents an original account of the early evolution of language. It explains why humans are the only language-using animals, challenges the assumption that language is a consequence of intelligence, and offers a new perspective on human uniqueness. The author draws on evidence from archaeology, linguistics, cognitive science, and evolutionary biology. Making no assumptions about the reader's prior knowledge he first provides an introductory but critical survey of all sources of evidence for language evolution. He then considers what language itself reveals about its own and human origins and evolution. He shows that certain central aspects of language do not, unexpectedly, reflect what they are used for, are maladapted for their function. He considers why this should be, and argues that these odd aspects of language reveal important clues about its evolutionary origin. The Origins of Complex Language fulfils the promise of its title. In doing so it turns upside down conventional theories about the relation between cognition and expression, truth and reference, and the co-evolution of mind and body. Original in conception, brilliantly executed, stylishly written, this book will attract a wide range of readers interested in the evolution and origins of language.

The interaction of robotics with behavioral and cognitive sciences has always been tight. As often described in the literature, the living has inspired the construction of many robots. Yet, in this article, we focus on the reverse phenomenon: building robots can impact importantly the way we conceptualize behavior and cognition in animals and humans. This article presents a series of paradigmatic examples spanning from the modelling of insect navigation, the experimentation of the role of morphology to control locomotion, the development of foundational representations of the body and of the self/other distinction, the self-organization of language in robot societies, and the use of robots as therapeutic tools for children with developmental disorders. Through these examples, I review the way robots can be used as operational models confronting specific theories to reality, or can be used as proof of concepts, or as conceptual exploration tools generating new hypotheses, or used as experimental set ups to uncover particular behavioral properties in animals or humans, or even used as therapeutic tools. Finally, I discuss the fact that in spite of its role in the formation of many fundamental theories in behavioral and cognitive sciences, the use of robots is far from being accepted as a standard tool and contributions are often forgotten, leading to regular rediscoveries and slowing down cumulative progress. The article concludes by highlighting the high priority of further historical and epistemological work.

Introduction One of the tasks facing cognitive archaeology is to contribute towards an understanding of the nature and evolution of the human mind. We need to make explicit reference to past cognition when interpreting the archaeological record and to draw inferences from that data concerning ancient minds . Did, for instance, Homo habilis have language, Homo erectus self-awareness or Neanderthals the capacity for analogical reasoning? While fossil endocasts may inform about brain structure, the character of past cognition must be largely inferred from the archaeological record. And to draw such inferences archaeologists need to engage with, or rather become participants in, the cognitive sciences - just as Bloch (1991) has recently argued for anthropology. This is essential since we cannot pretend to understand the ancient mind without entering debates concerning the character of the modern mind. In this paper I focus on one of these debates, that concerning whether the mind is a general purpose learning mechanism or composed of a series of relatively independent mental modules - psychological mechanisms dedicated to specific tasks or behavioural domains. My review of this debate suggests that a major feature of human cognitive evolution has been increased accessibility between mental modules resulting in a generalized intelligence, though one remaining within a modular architecture. I consider whether the Middle/Upper Palaeolithic transition may have constituted a phase in human evolution during which there was a significant development from domain specific to generalized intelligence.

A data-based, nonpolemic approach to the integration of the study of human behavior and management science ought to be feasible. Yet, the proponents and propagators of such behavioral terms as Theory Y, open-systems, encounter groups, Motivator-Hygiene variables, the Management Grid, and others have often exhibited more management than science. In this column, we will try to put away the buzz-words and take a “Behavioral Science” perspective. By “Behavioral” we refer to any data collected from observations of human behavior, much of which is to be found in the fields of psychology, sociology, political science, and, upon occasion, that part of the field of economics which concerns itself with the real world. “Science” refers to serious attempts at objective inquiry, although controversy may exist as to satisfaction of the objectivity.

In recent decades, cognitive and behavioral knowledge in dogs seems to have developed considerably, as deduced from the published peer-reviewed articles. However, to date, the worldwide trend of scientific research on dog cognition and behavior has never been explored using a bibliometric approach, while the evaluation of scientific research has increasingly become important in recent years. In this review, we compared the publication trend of the articles in the last 34 years on dogs’ cognitive and behavioral science with those in the general category “Behavioral Science”. We found that, after 2005, there has been a sharp increase in scientific publications on dogs. Therefore, the year 2005 has been used as “starting point” to perform an in-depth bibliometric analysis of the scientific activity in dog cognitive and behavioral studies. The period between 2006 and 2018 is taken as the study period, and a backward analysis was also carried out. The data analysis was performed using “bibliometrix”, a new R-tool used for comprehensive science mapping analysis. We analyzed all information related to sources, countries, affiliations, co-occurrence network, thematic maps, collaboration network, and world map. The results scientifically support the common perception that dogs are attracting the interest of scholars much more now than before and more than the general trend in cognitive and behavioral studies. Both, the changes in research themes and new research themes, contributed to the increase in the scientific production on the cognitive and behavioral aspects of dogs. Our investigation may benefit the researchers interested in the field of cognitive and behavioral science in dogs, thus favoring future research work and promoting interdisciplinary collaborations.

Psychology has traditionally seen itself as the science of universal human cognition, but it has only recently begun seriously grappling with cross-cultural variation. Here we argue that the roots of cross-cultural variation often lie in the past. Therefore, to understand not only how but also why psychology varies, we need to grapple with cross-temporal variation. The traces of past human cognition accessible through historical texts and artifacts can serve as a valuable, and almost completely unutilized, source of psychological data. These data from dead minds open up an untapped and highly diverse subject pool. We review examples of research that may be classified as historical psychology, introduce sources of historical data and methods for analyzing them, explain the critical role of theory, and discuss how psychologists can add historical depth and nuance to their work. Psychology needs to become a historical science if it wants to be a genuinely universal science of human cognition and behavior.

The question about when and how language emerged in human evolution has been a major and intriguing question since at least the classical Egyptian times. It is reported that the Pharaoh Psamtik took two children to be raised by deaf-mutes, in order to find out what was the first and natural language.When these childrenwere later observed, one of them said something that sounded like bekos, the Phrygian word for bread. From this, Psamtik concluded that Phrygian was the first and original language. During the following centuries, the origin of language continued as a most intriguing and polemic question. Different approaches and interpretations were proposed throughout the history. At a certain point, the debate became so complex and hot, that in 1866 the Linguistic Society of Paris banned discussion of the origin of language, arguing that it to be an unanswerable problem. Contemporary research on linguistics, archeology, comparative psychology and genetics has significantly advanced in understanding the origins of human language (e.g., Bickerton, 1990; Corballis, 2002, 2006; Enard et al. 2002; Mallory, 1989; Nowak and Krakauer, 1999; Ruhlen, 1994; Swadesh, 1967; Tallerman, 2005). Different disciplines have contributed from their own perspective to make human communication system more comprehensible. Thepurposeof thispaper isnot to furtherreviewanddiscuss thehistoricalorigins of language, but to relate what is known (or supposed) on the origins of language, withcontemporaryneurologyandneuropsychologydata,particularly,with thearea of aphasia. Aphasia knowledge can potentially alsomake a significant contribution to the understanding about the origin and evolution of human language.

This article introduces a vocabulary suitable for evolutionary analyses in the human cognitive, social, and behavioral sciences. The vocabulary carves a middle way between advocates and critics of evolutionary perspectives by substituting the concept of repeated assembly for nature-nurture dualism. A model of core configurations-based on human morphology and ecology in human evolutionary history-is presented, and I argue that these configurations of face-to-face groups are the selective context for uniquely human mental systems. Hence, human cognition is "truly social,"" specialized for group living. The relevance of the core configuration model is illustrated with respect to two areas of interest to social psychologists: the self and social identity, and distributed cognition and shared reality. A final section illustrates the integrative power of the core configuration model with a brief comparison of the social and cognitive tasks faced by scientists and foragers.