安全驾驶技巧心 理 学 报 2007，39（3）：383~397 Acta Psychologica Sinica
lbelieve是什么意思
383
An Integrative Model of Human Brain, Cognitive, and Behavioral Evolution
David C. Geary
University of Missouri at Columbia, USA
The evolved function of brain, cognitive, and behavioral systems is to allow organisms to attempt to gain control of the social, biological, and physical resources that have covaried with survival and reproductive options during the species’ evolutionary history. The information generated by the resources ranges from stable (e.g., prototypical shape of human face) to unpredictable (e.g., changing facial expressions). Stable information is predicted to result in the evolution of modular brain and cognitive systems and implicit, automatic behavioral respons. For humans, the systems coalesce around the domains of folk psychology, folk biology, and folk physics. Unpredictable information is predicted to be associated with the evolution of brain and cognitive systems that enable explicit, consciously driven top-down behavioral respons. For humans, the evolution of the explicit systems
resulted in the emergence of lf-awareness and the ability to consciously simulate control-related problem solving behavioral strategies. A motivation-to-control theory that incorporates the folk domains and conscious, lf-aware problem solving is described.
Keywords ：evolutionary history, folk psychology, folk biology, folk physics.
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。
关键词：进化历史，朴素心理学，朴素生物学，朴素物理学。 分类号：B84-069
Darwin and Wallace (1958, p. 54) described natural
lection as a “struggle for existence”, but perhaps it
is better described as a ‘struggle for control.’ It is not
that individuals necessarily have a conscious, explicit
好听英文歌motive to control other members of their species, such
as potential mates, or other species, such as potential
托收行>广东高考英语prey. Rather, the result of natural and xual lection
(e.g., competition for mates) has been the evolution of
brain and cognitive systems that are nsitive to and
process the types of information that have covaried
with survival and reproductive outcomes during the
species’ evolutionary history (Geary & Huffman,
2002; Geary, 2005). The operation of the systems
bias behavior so that it is focud on the corresponding informational features of the ecology
(e.g., movement patterns of prey) and on attempts to
achieve behavioral control of the potential resources
(e.g., prey capture). In most species and often forbestofme
humans, the process occur below conscious
Received 2006-06-30
Correspondence should be addresd to David C. Geary, Department of
Psychological Sciences, 210 McAlester Hall, University of Missouri,
Columbia, MO 65211-2500, USA; e-mail: gearyd@missouri.edu.
awareness, that is, implicitly, and automatically; humans can at times consciously focus on the contr
ol of other people and other forms of resource. My proposal is that many of the functional features of brain and cognition have evolved to guide behavioral attempts to organize the world in ways that eliminated predatory risks and enhanced survival and reproductive options. The shorthand for the bias is the motivation to control (e Geary, 2005). To illustrate the concept, consider variation in the size and shape of the beaks of different species of finch on the Galápagos islands, often called Darwin’s finches. Across the species, variation in beak morphology has evolved in respon to the different
food sources on the various islands (Grant, 1999; Grant & Grant, 2002). The long and thin beak of the woodpecker finch (Cactospiza pallida ) enables the u of cactus spines to pry inct pupae out of tree bark, whereas the stout and deep beak of the large
ground finch (Geospiza magnirostris ) enables the
manipulation and cracking open of casings around the eds of the caltrop plant (Tribulus cistoides ). The beaks of the finches and associated perceptual
raining sunshine384心 理 学 报 39卷
bias and foraging behaviors can be understood as evolved traits that enable them to locate and to gain access to specific food sources. The birds do not have a conscious motivation to control the resources, but their evolved traits nonetheless function in ways that result in resource control. By conceptualizing the adaptations in terms of control, the relation between the trait and the evolved functional link with respect to specific social or ecological pressures is highlighted.
In the following ctions, I outline the basic components of the motivation-to-control model as related to human evolution. In the first ction, the focus is on basic changes in brain volume and organization during hominid evolution, lection pressures that may have resulted in the changes, and the potential relation between the motivation to control and the changes. In the cond ction, the focus is on the cognitive and affective mechanisms and folk systems (e.g., folk psychology) that are components of the motivation to control. The final ction provides an illustration of the utility of the motivation-to-control model for organizing rearch on social cognitions and social bias.
Hominid Evolution and the Motivation to Control The ction begins with an overview of changes in brain size and organization during hominid evolution, and with discussions of potential lection pressures that drove the evolutionary changes. This discussion is followed by an overview of the b
asic components of the motivation-to-control model.
Brain Evolution
Brain Encephalization and Organization
To control for the relation between body weight and brain size, the encephalization quotient (EQ) is an often ud measure of evolutionary change in brain volume (Jerison, 1973). An EQ of 1.0 means that the brain volume of the species is average for a mammal of the same body weight. By creating casts of the inner surface of fossil skulls, brain volume and the structure of the outer surface of the brain can be recreated (Holloway, Broadfield, & Yuan, 2004). The endocasts allow for the study of patterns of evolutionary change in brain volume, organization of the surface of the neocortex, and can be ud to estimate EQ. Using the techniques, the EQ of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and species of Australopithecus that preceded the emergence of Homo are estimated at about 2.0, indicating that their brains are (or were) double the size of that of a typical mammal of the same body weight. Since the emergence of australopithecines, about four million years ago, brain volume has roughly tripled and EQ estimates have incread two to three fold such that the EQ of modern humans is about 6.0 (Jerison, 1973; Ruff, Trinkaus, & Holliday, 1997).berze
The brain has also been reorganized in important ways (Holloway, 1973; Tobias, 1987). On the basis of endocast patterns, there appears to have been modest evolutionary expansions in the volume of the frontal and parietal lobes and extensive remodeling; specifically, evidence for more folding and thus more surface area of the frontal lobes with the emergence of H. habilis about 2.5 million years ago (Falk, 1983; Tobias, 1987). As an example, one area of the frontal lobe that supports human speech and gesture, specifically, Broca’s area appears to have expanded relative to australopithecines and had an architecture similar to that of modern humans. The right prefrontal cortex also appears to have undergone an evolutionary expansion since the emergence of H. habilis (Holloway & de al Coste-Lareymondie, 1982). Evolutionary change in this area of the brain is intriguing becau it may support lf awareness and mental time travel (Suddendorf & Corballis, 1997; Wheeler, Stuss, & Tulving, 1997), important components of the motivation-to-control model. The increa in the size of the parietal cortex is interesting as well (Holloway, 1996). This is becau it is coincident with increasingly sophisticated tool u with and after the emergence of H. habilis, and is engaged during tool u in modern humans, and becau the areas are involved in controlled attention as related to working memory.
The most substantive increas in brain volume and EQ, as well as changes in brain organization ha
ve occurred since the emergence of modern humans and the immediate predecessor species, H. erectus (Ruff et al., 1997). In fact, recent comparative genomic studies have identified veral genes involved in prenatal brain development and organization that appear to have been under inten lection pressures since the emergence H. erectus (Pollard, Salama, Lambert, Lambot, Coppens, Pedern et al., 2006) and continuing with modern humans (Evans, Anderson, Vallender, Gilbert, Malcom, Dorus, & Lahn, 2004; Mekel-Bobrov, Gilbert, Evans, Vallender, Anderson, Hudson, et al., 2005; Zhang, 2003). In other words, there is evidence for the recent and ongoing evolution of the genes and associated brain systems. Selection Pressures
Three forms of lection pressure have been propod as driving evolutionary change in the human brain; climatic (Vrba, 1995), ecological (Kaplan, Hill, Lancaster, & Hurtado, 2000; Wrangham, Holland Jones, Laden, Pilbeam, & Conklin-Brittain, 1999), and social (Alexander, 1989; Humphrey, 1976). The common theme across the proposals is that the human brain and mind evolved to enable the anticipation and thus improved behavioral coping
3期 David C. Geary. An Integrative Model of Human Brain, Cognitive, and Behavioral Evolution385
with unpredictable climatic, ecological, or social change within a lifetime. For reasons described el
where, climatic variability is not likely to have been the primary form of lection pressure that drove the evolutionary changes (e Geary, 2005); for instance, most of the changes in brain volume and EQ in H. habilis and H. erectus do not appear to have been coupled with periods of rapid climatic variation (White, 1995). There is, in contrast, evidence that our ancestors – beginning at least as far back as the australopithecines (~ 4 million years ago) – became increasingly skilled in their ability to extract resources from the ecology through hunting and u of tools (Foley & Lahr, 1997; Wrangham et al., 1999). Incread skill at tool u almost certainly resulted in improvements in the ability to extract resources from the environment and exert increasing levels of ecological control; for instance, through u of fire (Goren-Inbar, Alperson, Kislev, Simchoni, Melamed, Ben-Nun, & Werker, 2004). It has been propod that improvements in ecological control eventually resulted in a critical change in the pattern of lection pressures experienced by our ancestors. Alexander (1989; e also Flinn, Geary, & Ward, 2005) termed this change the emergence of ecological dominance: “The ecological dominance of evolving humans diminished the effects of ‘extrinsic’ forces of natural lection such that within-species competition became the principle ‘hostile force of nature’ guiding the long-term evolution of behavioral capacities, traits, and tendencies” (Alexander, 1989, p. 458). Ecological dominance is the ability to efficiently extract biological resources from the ecology and manipulate the ecology in ways that substantially reduce
mortality risks (Hill, Boesch, Goodall, Puy, Williams, & Wrangham, 2001; Kaplan et al., 2000); the achievement of ecological dominance may have triggered the population expansions and migration of H. erectus into Asia and the Middle East. More important, ecological dominance results in the potential for the creation of demographic “pumps”, whereby lower mortality rates and increas in the amount of food extracted from the ecology result in an expanding population. As was argued by Malthus in 1798, populations typically expand until they reach a point that exceeds the carrying capacity of the ecology. When this occurs either some portion of the population must migrate or the population will crash, that is, there will be a sharp increa in mortality. Following the crash, the pressures on the ecology are reduced (e.g., native species recover) and this in turn ts the stage for another population expansion. The cycles of expansions and contractions are important becau they provide a mechanism for rapid change in our ancestors. During population contractions, social competition for diminishing resources will necessarily increa in intensity (Malthus, 1798) and any trait that facilitates the ability to compete with other people for control of the resources will evolve rapidly.
This is where Darwin’s and Wallace’s (1858, p. 54) “struggle for existence”, becomes in addition a struggle with other human beings for control of the resources that support life and allow one to repro
duce (Geary, 1998, 2005). In addition to competition within the social group, a struggle with other groups for ecological control would follow, if ecologies varied in the quantity and quality of the resources – such as prey species, water, shelter – contained therein. Becau ability to control resource-rich ecologies is likely to be enhanced with the formation of large competitive social groups (Dunbar & Bever, 1998; Wrangham, 1999), the result is pressures for the evolution of social-competitive competencies that support the ability to form kin-bad social coalitions (Geary & Flinn, 2001). Members of the coalitions (the in-group) cooperate to compete with other kin-bad coalitions (the out-group) for ecological control. The point is that Kaplan et al.’s (2000) and others’ (e.g., Tiger, 1969) theory of the relation between ecological pressures and hominid brain evolution is consistent with Alexander’s (1989) and others’ (e.g., Flinn et al., 2005; Humphrey, 1976) theory of the relation between social pressures and hominid brain evolution. Alexander’s proposal implies that ecological pressures were more salient earlier in hominid evolution and social pressures were more salient later in hominid evolution.
Motivation to Control
The basic thesis is that the brain and mind has evolved to attend to and process the forms of information that covaried with survival and reproductive prospects during the species’ evolutionary hi
story. The systems bias implicit decision making process and behavioral respons in ways that allow the organism to attempt to achieve access to and control of the resources (e Gigerenzer, Todd, & and ABC Rearch Group, 1999). Although not typically prented in an evolutionary context, the proposal fits well with the connsus among psychologists that humans have a basic motivation to achieve some level of control over relationships, events, and resources that of significance in their life (Fiske, 1993; Heckhaun & Schulz, 1995; Shapiro, Schwartz, & Astin, 1996; Taylor & Brown, 1988; Thompson, Armstrong, & Thomas, 1998). The proposal here and elwhere is that the human motivation to control is an evolved disposition and is implicitly focud on attempts to control social relationships and the behavior of other people, and to control the biological and physical resources that covary with survival and reproductive prospects in the local ecology (Geary, 1998, 2005).
386 心 理 学 报 39卷
The constellations of traits that enable attempts to control the resources are shown in Figure 1. The ba of the figure reprents folk modules – described in Domains of the Human Mind – that direct the individual’s attention toward and enable the automatic and implicit processing of social (e.g., facial expressions), biological (e.g., features of hunted species), and physical (e.g., manipulatio
n of objects as tools) information patterns that have been invariant during human evolution and have been associated with survival or reproductive prospects. The reprent the respective domains of folk psychology, folk biology, and folk physics. The center of the figure reprents brain and cognitive systems, such as working memory, that function to cope with evolutionarily significant information patterns (e.g., social dynamics) that tend to vary within the life span and across generations. For instance, many forms of social relationship, such as mother-infant attachments and friendships, are found across generations and in all cultures (Bugental, 2000), but the details of any one relationship can vary across individuals and time; the mechanisms are elaborated in Evolution of Control-Related Cognitive and Affective Systems.
Figure 1: The apex and following ction reprent the proposal that human behavioral bais conceptualized reflecting an evolved motivation to control the social, biological, and physical resources that have tended to covary survival and reproductive outcomes during human evolution. The midction shows the supporting affective, conscious-psychological (e.g., attributional bias), and cognitive (e.g., working memory) mechanisms that support the motivation to control and operate on the folk modular systems shown at the ba.emma mae
Benefits of Control
If brain, cognitive, and behavioral traits have evolved in ways that facilitate the identification and control of social, biological, and physical resources, then individual differences in resource control should correlate with individual differences in survival rates and reproductive outcomes. Biological resources
include food and medicine, and physical resources include the territories that contain biological resources and that support homes, agriculture, pastures, and so on. In modern societies some resources are symbolic (e.g., money, stocks), but are important becau control of the resources enhances social influence and facilitates control of quality foods, medicines, and housing. Although humans have psychological mechanisms that obscure the fact that they often u social relationships and other people for their own ends (Alexander, 1989; Trivers, 2000), u them they do. Other people are resources if they have reproductive potential (e.g., young females; Buss, 1994), social power, or access (e.g., through monetary wealth) to the biological and physical resources that covary with wellbeing and status in the culture (Irons, 1979).
In most contexts and for most people, the motivation to control is constrained by formal laws, informal cultural customs, and by psychological mechanisms (e.g., guilt) that promote social compromi and reciprocal social relationships (Barkow, 1992; Baron, 1997; Trivers, 1971). For mos
t people, adherence to the laws and customs provides benefits that are sufficient to avoid the risks associated with attempts to achieve, for instance, absolute despotic control (Simon, 1990). Nevertheless, consideration of history’s despots allows for a clear asssment of the benefits of resource control. The individuals have considerable social power and their behavior is not typically constrained by psychological (e.g., guilt) or social conquences. The individuals and the coalitions of men they led gained control of the first six human civilizations – ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, the Aztec and Inca empires, and imperial India and China (Betzig, 1986, 1993). Across the and many other civilizations, despots diverted the material and social resources of the culture to themlves and to their kin, typically to the detriment of many other people. On the basis of the historical record, despots, their kin, and members of their coalitions lived in opulence and the men almost always had exclusive xual access to many women. Social Modules Biological Modules Physical Modules
Underlying Modular Systems服务员英文翻译
Affective
Conscious- Psychological
Cognitive
Supporting Mechanisms Behavioral Strategies Control Motivation Population genetic studies support the historical record and provide more direct evidence for the reproductive benefits of despotism and more subtle forms of ecological and social control (Carvajal-Carmona, Soto, Pineda, Ortíz-Barrientos, Duque, & Ospina-Duque et al., 2000; Underhill, Passarino, Lin, Shen, Lahr, & Foley et al., 2001). As just one example, Zerjal, Xue, Bertorelle, Wells, Bao, and Zhu et al. (2003) analyzed the Y-chromosome genes of 2,123 men from regions throughout Asia. They found that 8% of the men in this part of the world have a single common ancestor who emerged from Mongolia and lived about 1,000 years ago. The geographic distribution of the genes fits well with the historic
3期 David C. Geary. An Integrative Model of Human Brain, Cognitive, and Behavioral Evolution387
boundaries of the empire of Genghis Khan (c. 1162-1227), who was known to have had hundreds of wives and children. They estimated that Genghis Khan and his clo male relatives are the direct ancestors of 16 million men in Asia, ranging from northeast China to Uzbekistan, and the ancestors of about 0.5% of the world’s population. Genghis Khan is, of cour, an extreme example. As with other traits, it is almost certain that there are individual differences in the intensity of the motivation to control and individual differences in the manner in which it is expresd (Pratto, 1996).
Nonetheless, gaining some level of control over the activities of daily life, important social relationships, and material resources affords many of the same benefits, but on a smaller scale, as tho enjoyed by despots. Even in resource-rich Western culture, socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with a longer life span and better physical health (e.g., Adler, Boyce, Chesney, Cohen, Folkman, Kahn, R & Syme, 1994; Bradley & Corwyn, 2002; Marmot, 2004). In a review of the relations among wealth, mortality risks, and psychological factors (e.g., depression), Gallo and Matthews (2003, p. 11) defined SES as “an aggregate concept defined according to one’s level of resources or prestige in relation to others.” This definition has a clear and substantive social component: The level of actual resources is important but, in addition, one’s position in the social hierarchy influences and is influenced by physical health, lifespan, and psychological functioning (e.g., lf esteem). The social psychological components are described in Evolution of Human Psychology, but from an evolutionary perspective are only important to the extent SES influences survival and reproductive prospects.
In preindustrial and industrializing Western societies, the relation between SES and mortality risks was much stronger than it is in Western culture today (e.g., Hed, 1987; Herlihy, 1965; Morrison, Kirshner, & Molho, 1977; Schultz, 1991). In fact, parental SES often influenced which infants and yo
ung children would live and which would die, especially during population crashes. During the 1437-1438 and 1449-1450 epidemics in Florence, Italy, child mortality rates incread 5- to 10-fold and varied inverly with parental SES even at the high end of the continuum (Morrison et al., 1977). In an extensive analysis of birth, death, and demographic records from 18th century Berlin, Schultz (1991) found a strong correlation (r = .74) between parental SES and infant and child mortality rates. Infant (birth to 1 year) mortality rates were about 10% for aristocrats but more than 40% for laborers and unskilled technicians. The patterns are found throughout the historical record and in many developing and traditional societies today (Hill & Hurtado, 1996; United Nations, 1985).
Given the relations, it is not surprising that individual and group-level conflicts of interest are invariably over access to and control of social relationships, other people, and the biological and physical resources that covary with survival or reproductive prospects in the local ecology and culture (Alexander, 1979; Chagnon, 1988; Horowitz, 2001; Irons, 1979; Keeley, 1996). Although the relations are often masked by the wealth and low mortality rates enjoyed in Western and industrializing societies today, the implication is clear: In most human societies and presumably throughout hominid evolution, gaining social influence and control of biological and physical resources, that is, food, medicine, shelter, land, and so forth, covaried with reproductive opportunity (
<, choice of mating partner), reproductive success (i.e., offspring survival to adulthood), and survival prospects. The relation between social influence, resource control, and survival and reproductive outcomes places the associated brain, cognitive, and behavioral traits within the motivation-to-control framework. In other words, traits that facilitate competition with other humans for resource control have and will continue to evolve, becau success at achieving this control very often meant the difference between living and dying.
Control-Related Cognitive and Affective
Mechanisms
The following ctions prent a brief introduction to the brain, cognitive, affective, and conscious-psychological mechanisms who evolution is predicted to have accelerated following the achievement of ecological dominance; details are prented elwhere (e Alexander, 1989; Flinn et al., 2005; Geary, 2005). The first ction overviews the mechanisms at the center of Figure 1 and that are predicted to have evolved to enable individuals to cope to with variant or unpredictable information patterns, that is, situations that vary across generations and within lifetimes. The situations are largely social, but can involve some aspects associated with ecological dominance, su
ch as hunting (Maynard Smith & Price, 1973). The cond ction overviews the basics of the folk modular systems at the bottom of Figure 1; the are predicted to have evolved to process information patterns that are invariant across generations and within lifetimes (e.g., the prototypical shape of a human face).
In effect, the folk systems reprented by the ba of Figure 1 reprent evolved brain, perceptual, and cognitive bias that process information patterns that have tended to be stable across generations. Most of the time, this information will be procesd implicitly and automatically (e.g., changes in facial expressions)
