In Defense of Murdock: A Reply to Dickemann

Learning motivated by electrical stimulation of the brain.

Cardiovascular effects of face immersion and factors affecting diving reflex in man.

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

PROJECTION OF THE RETINA ON SUPERIOR COLLICULUS OF CATS

Cognitive Mapping and the Origin of Language and Mind

Male–male competition and female mate choice act contemporaneously in the cockroach Nauphoeta cinerea and the social pheromone of males influences the outcome of both forms of sexual selection. We therefore examined the joint and separate effects of male–male competition and female mate choice to determine if the selective optima for the pheromone were the same or different. Dominant males in a newly established hierarchy mated more frequently, but not exclusively. Manipulations of the multi-component social pheromone produced by males of N. cinerea showed that both long- and close-range attraction of females by males were influenced by the quantity and composition of the pheromone. The most attractive composition, however, differed from that which was most likely to confer high status to males. Since the outcome of male–male competition can conflict with mating preferences exhibited by females, there is balancing sexual selection on the social pheromone of N. cinerea. Such balancing selection might act to maintain genetic variation in sexually selected traits. We suggest that the different forms of sexual selection conflict in N. cinerea because females prefer a blend different to that which is most effective in male–male competition in order to avoid mating with overly aggressive males.

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 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

Recently, several behavioral sciences became increasingly interested in investigating biological and evolutionary foundations of (human) social behavior. In this light, prosocial behavior is seen as a core element of human nature. A central role within this perspective plays the “social brain” that is not only able to communicate with the environment but rather to interact directly with other brains via neuronal mind reading capacities such as empathy. From the perspective of a sociologist, this paper investigates what “social” means in contemporary behavioral and particularly brain sciences. It will be discussed what “social” means in the light of social neuroscience and a glance into the history of social psychology and the brain sciences will show that two thought traditions come together in social neuroscience, combining an individualistic and an evolutionary notion of the “social.” The paper concludes by situating current research on prosocial behavior in broader social discourses about sociality and society, suggesting that to naturalize prosocial aspects in human life is a current trend in today's behavioral sciences and beyond.

Next article No AccessHow Important Is Sexual Conflict?David Hosken and Rhonda SnookDavid Hosken Search for more articles by this author and Rhonda Snook Search for more articles by this author 1. Centre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter in Cornwall, Tremough, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9EZ, United Kingdom;2. Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, Alfred Denny Building, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomPDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 165, Number S5May 2005HOW IMPORTANT IS SEXUAL CONFLICT?A Special Issue Edited by David Hosken and Rhonda Snook Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/429355 Views: 127Total views on this site Citations: 25Citations are reported from Crossref © 2005 by The University of Chicago.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Marcus Lee, Carlota Solano Udina, Lars-Anders Hansson Fear of sex: sexual conflict exposed as avoidance in a parthenogenetic invertebrate, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 75, no.88 (Jul 2021).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-021-03054-9David J. Hosken, C. Ruth Archer, Clarissa M. House, Nina Wedell Penis evolution across species: divergence and diversity, Nature Reviews Urology 16, no.22 (Nov 2018): 98–106.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-018-0112-zRebecah E. Ford, Stephen C. Weeks, E. Hebets Intersexual conflict in androdioecious clam shrimp: Do androdioecious hermaphrodites evolve to avoid mating with males?, Ethology 124, no.55 (Apr 2018): 357–364.https://doi.org/10.1111/eth.12738Linda C. Hernández Duran, Gonzalo E. Fajardo Medina, Luz S. Fuentes Quintero Mating Opportunities in Sangalopsis veliterna Females: Costs and Benefits, Journal of Insect Science 14, no.112112 (Aug 2014): 1–9.https://doi.org/10.1673/031.014.112Akanksha Singh, Bashisth N. Singh Role of sexual selection in speciation in Drosophila, Genetica 142, no.11 (Dec 2013): 23–41.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-013-9751-4Krista M. Milich, Janice M. Bahr, Rebecca M. Stumpf, Colin A. Chapman Timing is everything: expanding the cost of sexual attraction hypothesis, Animal Behaviour 88 (Feb 2014): 219–224.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.11.029Ryne A. Palombit Sexual Conflict in Nonhuman Primates, (Jan 2014): 191–280.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800286-5.00005-5Abderrahman Khila, Ehab Abouheif, Locke Rowe Function, Developmental Genetics, and Fitness Consequences of a Sexually Antagonistic Trait, Science 336, no.60816081 (May 2012): 585–589.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1217258Adrian L. O'Loghlen, Stephen I. Rothstein, Jane M. Waterman When Less Is Best: Female Brown-Headed Cowbirds Prefer Less Intense Male Displays, PLoS ONE 7, no.55 (May 2012): e36130.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036130Rebecca M. Stumpf, Rodolfo Martinez-Mota, Krista M. Milich, Nicoletta Righini, Milena R. Shattuck Sexual conflict in primates, Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 20, no.22 (Apr 2011): 62–75.https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20297Matthew D. Hall, Simon P. Lailvaux, Mark W. Blows, Robert C. Brooks SEXUAL CONFLICT AND THE MAINTENANCE OF MULTIVARIATE GENETIC VARIATION, Evolution 64, no.66 (Dec 2009): 1697–1703.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00932.xAdrian L. O’Loghlen, Stephen I. Rothstein Multimodal signalling in a songbird: male audiovisual displays vary significantly by social context in brown-headed cowbirds, Animal Behaviour 79, no.66 (Jun 2010): 1285–1292.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.03.001Ryne A. Palombit Conflict and Bonding Between the Sexes, (Sep 2009): 53–83.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02725-3_3John Archer Does sexual selection explain human sex differences in aggression?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32, no.3-43-4 (Aug 2009): 249.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X09990951KRISTA K. INGRAM, TORSTEN LAAMANEN, NALINI PUNIAMOORTHY, RUDOLF MEIER Lack of morphological coevolution between male forelegs and female wings in Themira (Sepsidae: Diptera: Insecta), Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 93, no.22 (Jan 2008): 227–238.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2007.00922.xDarryl T. Gwynne Sexual Conflict over Nuptial Gifts in Insects, Annual Review of Entomology 53, no.11 (Jan 2008): 83–101.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093423Y Teuschl, DJ Hosken, WU Blanckenhorn Is reduced female survival after mating a by-product of male-male competition in the dung fly Sepsis cynipsea?, BMC Evolutionary Biology 7, no.11 (Oct 2007).https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-7-194Karim Vahed Comparative evidence for a cost to males of manipulating females in bushcrickets, Behavioral Ecology 18, no.33 (Mar 2007): 499–506.https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arm021Karim Vahed All that Glisters is not Gold: Sensory Bias, Sexual Conflict and Nuptial Feeding in Insects and Spiders, Ethology 113, no.22 (Feb 2007): 105–127.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2006.01312.xPaul I. Ward Postcopulatory Selection in the Yellow Dung Fly Scathophaga stercoraria (L.) and the Mate‐Now‐Choose‐Later Mechanism of Cryptic Female Choice, (Jan 2007): 343–369.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-3454(07)37007-1A.V. Peretti, A. Córdoba-Aguilar On the value of fine-scaled behavioural observations for studies of sexual coercion, Ethology Ecology & Evolution 19, no.11 (Jan 2007): 77–86.https://doi.org/10.1080/08927014.2007.9522583W. Eberhard Sexually antagonistic coevolution in insects is associated with only limited morphological diversity, Journal of Evolutionary Biology 19, no.33 (May 2006): 657–681.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2005.01057.xSergey Gavrilets, Takehiko I Hayashi The dynamics of two- and three-way sexual conflicts over mating, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 361, no.14661466 (Jan 2006): 345–354.https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1792David J. Hosken, Paula Stockley Sexual conflict, Current Biology 15, no.1414 (Jul 2005): R535–R536.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2005.07.014Muhammad Qasim Zaman Review: Beyond Turk and Hindu: Rethinking Religious Identities in Islamicate South Asia, Journal of Islamic Studies 14, no.11 (Jan 2003): 112–116.https://doi.org/10.1093/jis/14.1.112

Cognitive neuroscience is an interdisciplinary area focusing on the application of neuroscience knowledge in areas such as neuroimaging studies, computer science, psychology, marketing, business, general and special education, social sciences, engineering, biology, learning science, health, etcetra. It is a new emerging field that may help Malaysia in the move towards 2050 for the development of economic, improve levels of knowledge and education, intensify healthcare, enhance people’s well-being and expand network collaboration. Academicians, scientists, industry and educators must concentrate on the application cognitive neuroscience in their field of studies. There is a lack of neuroscientists in these fields, and concentrated efforts must come from the top down as well as the bottom up. We need to bring brain and mind sciences and neuroscience to a reputable level that will improve physical and mental health and increase creativity and innovation in Malaysia: A national institute to amalgamate the creative and innovative mind, behaviour, and brain sciences and neuroscience must be established.

In this article, we present the case for the adoption of a neurodiversity paradigm as an essential framework within the brain and behavioral sciences. We challenge the deficit‐focused medical model by advocating for the recognition of neurocognitive variances—including autism, ADHD, dyslexia, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder—as natural representations of human diversity. We call for a shift in research and practice towards valuing neurodivergent individuals' unique strengths and contributions and promoting inclusivity and empathy. In critiquing the tendency to pathologize cognitive differences, we argue for a re‐evaluation of therapeutic goals to reflect a more nuanced understanding of neurodiversity. Highlighting the socio‐ethical implications of therapy‐focused research, we urge an appreciation of the potential for innovation and problem‐solving that neurodivergent individuals bring to society. The conclusion is a call to action for an integrated approach in research, policy, and societal attitudes that affirms neurodiversity, fostering an environment in which all forms of cognitive functioning are celebrated as part of human advancement.

It wasn't until I had a profound personal experience with mental illness in my family that I started covering psychiatry and psychology. In the late 19905, my son, Alex, was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. A few years later, my daughter, Alicia, began suffering from repeated bouts of severe depression. Even after they became ill, I resisted turning my reporting to mental health. But as I continued to experience the suffering that these illnesses can cause, I finally succumbed. If I was going to help my children, I needed to learn a lot more about psychiatry, both research and treatment. With a background covering research, I could have confined my reporting to published studies and conferences, the bread-and-butter of science coverage. But I quickly realized that by taking that approach, I would be getting only a small piece of the story. For one thing, research in the behavioral sciences is, as I had always suspected, at a rather primitive stage. Researchers know far more about the heart, the kidneys, and tumor cells than they do about the brain. That's understandable; the brain is a far more complex organ. The scandal, however, is that what is known about the brain is rarely taught to psychiatrists. “Most of the more advanced training for psychiatric residents is really apprenticeship training in which brain science plays little or no part,” write the Harvard psychiatrist J. Allan Hobson and the writer Jonathan A. Leonard in their book, Out of Its Mind: Psychiatry in Crisis (2002). “The brain science knowledge of many practicing psychiatrists remains mostly informal or even anecdotal, leaving psychotherapy and psychopharmacology separated, isolated, and diminished at a time when brain science has the ability to nourish and combine them in an empowering fashion.” The message to reporters is that if we are to understand psychiatry, psychology, and mental illness, and write capably about them, we must do more than peruse the scientific journals and attend the neuroscience meetings. We need to get out there in the trenches, by which I mean the homes and the minds and hearts of the families who are suffering from mental illness.

Non-Cartesian robotics, which began with the introduction of subsumption architecture by Rodney Brooks, now encompasses a wide range of robotics that do not follow traditional cartesian principles in the running of a robot. The new field is sometimes called biorobotics as it draws its guiding principles from biology, physiology, behavioural sciences, genetics and theories of evolution, brain sciences, genetics and theories of evolution, brain sciences, ethology, psychology, and other related non-engineering disciplines. The difference in principles of operation, however, has roots deeper in the philosophical underpinnings of the way we view controlling artifacts and the concept of control itself when it is contrasted against the concept of autonomy. Realization of increasingly higher levels of autonomy is routinely demanded today not only in industry where most robotic applications occur, but also in areas closer to our daily life where a gradual but steady increase in service applications of robotics is observed. This paper introduces the concept of non-Cartesian robotics as an antithesis to conventional (Cartesian) robotics and describes various aspects of this new way of running a robotic system.

Measures of Polygyny in Humans