Evolved Cognitive Mechanisms and Human Behavior

Foundations of Evolutionary Psychology

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 173-189

  Barrett, H Clark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85144401438     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203888155-18     Document Type: Chapter

References (113)

1. Abell, F., Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2000). Do triangles play tricks? Attribution of mental states to animated shapes in normal and abnormal development. Journal of Cognitive Development, 15, 1-20
2. Almor, A., & Sloman, S. (1996). Is deontic reasoning special? Psychological Review, 103, 374-380
3. Baddeley, A. D. (2002). Is working memory still working? European Psychologist, 7, 85-97
4. Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mind blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Barrett, H. C. (1999). Guilty minds: How perceived intent, incentive, and ability to cheat influence social contract reasoning. Paper presented at the 11th annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society, Salt Lake City, UT.
6. Barrett, H. C. (2005a). Adaptations to predators and prey. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp 200-223). New York: Wiley.
7. Barrett, H. C. (2005b). Enzymatic computation and cognitive modularity. Mind and Language, 20, 259-287
8. Barrett, H. C., Frederick, D., Haselton, M., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Can manipulations of cognitive load be used to test evolutionary hypotheses? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 513-518
9. Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113, 628-647
10. Barrett, H. C., Todd, P. M., Miller, G. F., & Blythe, P. (2005). Accurate judgments of intention from motion alone: A cross-cultural study. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 313-331
11. Barton, J. J., Press, D. Z., Keenan, J. P., & O’Connor, M. (2002). Lesions of the fusiform face area impair perception of facial configuration in prosopagnosia. Neurology, 58, 71-78
12. Bateson, M., Nettle, D., & Roberts, G. (2006). Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biology Letters, 2, 412-414
13. Behne, T., Carpenter, M., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Unwilling versus unable: Infants’ understanding of intentional action. Developmental Psychology, 41, 328-337
14. Betzig, L., & Turke, P. (1986). Food sharing on Ifaluk. Current Anthropology, 27, 397-400
15. Bevc, I., & Silverman, I. (2000). Early separation and sibling incest: A test of the revised Westermarck theory. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21, 151-161
16. Bittles, A. H., & Neel, J. V. (1994). The costs of human inbreeding and their implications for variation at the DNA level. Nature Genetics, 8, 117-121
17. Buller, D. (2005). Adapting minds: Evolutionary psychology and the persistent quest for human nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
18. Burnham, T., & Hare, B. (in press). Engineering human cooperation: Does involuntary neural activation increase public goods contributions? Human Nature.
19. Burnstein, E. (2005). Altruism and genetic relatedness. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp 528-551). New York: Wiley.
20. Carpenter, M., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Twelve- and 18-month-olds copy actions in terms of goals. Developmental Science, 8, F13-F20
21. Carruthers, P. (2002). Modularity, language, and the flexibility of thought. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 705-719
22. Carruthers, P. (2005). The case for massively modular models of mind. In R. Stainton (Ed.), Contemporary debates in cognitive science (pp 205-225). Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
23. Cashdan, E. (1988). Adaptiveness of food learning and food aversions in children. Social Science Information, 37, 613-632
24. Castelli, F., Happé, F., Frith, U., & Frith, C. D. (2000). Movement and mind: A functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. NeuroImage, 12, 314-325
25. Chagnon, N., & Bugos, P. E. (1979). Kin selection and conflict: An analysis of a Yanomamö ax fight. In N. Chagnon & W. Irons (Eds.), Evolutionary biology and human social behavior (pp 213-237). North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press.
26. Cheng, P., & Holyoak, K. (1985). Pragmatic reasoning schemas. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 391-416
27. Cosmides, L. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition, 31, 187-278
28. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1987). From evolution to behavior: Evolutionary psychology as the missing link. In J. Dupre (Ed.), The latest on the best: Essays on evolution and optimality (pp 277-306). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp 163-228). New York: Oxford University Press.
30. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2005). Social exchange: The evolutionary design of a neurocognitive system. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The new cognitive neurosciences (Vol. 3, pp 1295-1308). Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
31. Csibra, G., Bíró, S., Koós, O., & Gergely, G. (2003). One-year-old infants use teleological representations of actions productively. Cognitive Psychology, 27, 111-133
32. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
33. Damasio, A. R., Damasio, H., & van Hoesen, G. W. (1982). Prosopagnosia: Anatomic basis and behavioral mechanisms. Neurology, 32, 331-341
34. DeBruine, L. M. (2002). Facial resemblance enhances trust. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 269, 1307-1312
35. DeBruine, L. M. (2005). Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: Context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 272, 919-922
36. Diamond, R., & Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 115, 107-117
37. Duchaine, B. (2000). Developmental prosopagnosia with normal configural processing. Neuroreport, 11, 79-83
38. Duchaine, B., & Nakayama, K. (2005). Dissociations of face and object recognition in developmental prosopagnosia. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 249-261
39. Duchaine, B., Yovel, G., Butterworth, E., & Nakayama, K. (2006). Prosopagnosia as an impairment to facespecific mechanisms: Elimination of the alternative hypotheses in a developmental case. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23, 714-747
40. Farah, M. J. (1990). Visual agnosia. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. Farah, M. J. (1996). Is face recognition “special?” Evidence from neuropsychology. Behavioural Brain Research, 76, 181-189
42. Farah, M. J., Wilson, K. D., Drain, H. M., & Tanaka, J. R. (1995). The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms. Vision Research, 35, 2089-2093
43. Fessler, D. M. T., & Navarrete, C. D. (2004). Third-party attitudes toward sibling incest: Evidence for Westermarck’s hypotheses. Evolution & Human Behavior, 25, 277-294
44. Fiddick, L. (2004). Domains of deontic reasoning: Resolving the discrepancy between the cognitive and moral reasoning literatures. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A(4), 447-474
45. Fodor, J. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46. Fodor, J. (2000). The mind doesn’t work that way: The scope and limits of computational psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
47. Fox, J. R. (1962). Sibling incest. British Journal of Sociology, 13, 128-150
48. Freire, A., Lee, K., & Symons, L. A. (2000). The face-inversion effect as a deficit in encoding of configural information: Direct evidence. Perception, 29, 159-170
49. Gallistel, C. R. (1990). The organization of learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
50. Gauthier, I., & Tarr, M. J. (1997). Becoming a “greeble” expert: Exploring mechanisms for face recognition. Vision Research, 37, 1673-1682
51. Gentner, D. (1999). Analogy. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (Eds.), The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp 17-20). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52. Gergely, G., Nádasdy, Z., Csibra, G., & Bíró, S. (1995). Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition, 56, 165-193
53. Gigerenzer, G., & Hug, K. (1992). Domain specific reasoning: Social contracts, cheating, and perspective change. Cognition, 43, 127-171
54. Haley, K. J., & Fessler, D. M. T. (2005). Nobody’s watching?: Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 245-256
55. Hames, R. (1987). Relatedness and garden labor exchange among the Ye’kwana. Ethology and Sociobiology, 8, 354-392
56. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour I and II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1-16, 17-52
57. Haxby, J. V., Hoffman, E. A., & Gobbini, M. I. (2002). Human neural systems for face recognition and social communication. Biological Psychiatry, 51(1), 59-67
58. Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language. New York: Oxford University Press.
59. Jacob, S., McClintock, M. K., Zelano, B., & Ober, C. (2002). Paternally inherited HLA alleles are associated with women’s choice of male odor. Nature Genetics, 30, 175-179
60. Jankowiak, W., & Diderich, M. (2000). Sibling solidarity in a polygamous community in the USA: Unpacking inclusive fitness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21, 125-139
61. Johnson, M. H., & Morton, J. (1991). Biology and cognitive development: The case of face recognition. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
62. Johnson, S., Slaughter, V., & Carey, S. (1998). Whose gaze will infants follow? The elicitation of gaze-following in 12-month-olds. Developmental Science, 1, 233-238
63. Johnson, S. C. (2000). The recognition of mentalistic agents in infancy. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4(1), 22-28
64. Johnson, S. C., Booth, A., & O’Hearn, K. (2001). Inferring the unseen goals of a non-human agent. Cognitive Development, 16, 637-656
65. Judge, D. S., & Hrdy, S. B. (1992). Allocation of accumulated resources among close kin: Inheritance in Sacramento, California, 1890-1984, Ethology and Sociobiology, 13, 495-522
66. Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., & Chun, M. M. (1997). The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 4302-4311
67. Kaplan, H., & Hill, K. (1985). Food sharing among Ache foragers: Tests of explanatory hypotheses. Current Anthropology, 26, 223-246
68. Kosslyn, S., Hamilton, S., & Bernstein, J. (1995). The perception of curvature can be selectively disrupted in prosopagnosia. Brain and Cognition, 27, 36-58
69. Kurland, J. A., & Gaulin, S. J. C. (2005). Cooperation and conflict among kin. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp 447-482). New York: Wiley.
70. Kurzban, R. (2001). The social psychophysics of cooperation: Nonverbal communication in a public goods game. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25, 241-259
71. Le Grand, R., Mondloch, C. J., Maurer, D., & Brent, H. P. (2003). Expert face processing requires visual input to the right hemisphere during infancy. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 1108-1112
72. Leonards, U., Sunaert, S., Van Hecke, P., & Orban, G. A. (2000). Attention mechanisms in visual search: An fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 61-75
73. Leslie, A. M. (1994). ToMM, ToBy, and agency: Core architecture and domain specificity. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp 119-148). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
74. Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2003). Does morality have a biological basis? An empirical test of the factors governing moral sentiments relating to incest. Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences, 270, 819-826
75. Manktelow, K., & Over, D. (1987). Reasoning and rationality. Mind and Language, 2, 199-219
76. Meltzoff, A. N. (1995). Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-monthold children. Developmental Psychology, 31(5), 838-850
77. Michotte, A. (1963). The perception of causality. New York: Basic Books.
78. Morton, J., & Johnson, M. H. (1991). CONSPEC and CONLERN: A two-process theory of infant face recognition. Psychological Review, 98, 164-181
79. Moscovitch, M., Winocur, G., & Behrmann, M. (1997). What is special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 555-604
80. Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (1994). A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 101, 608-631
81. Ober, C., Weitkamp, L. R., Cox, N., Dytch, H., Kostyu, D., & Elias, S. (1997). HLA and mate choice in humans. American Journal of Human Genetics, 61, 497-504
82. Öhman, A., & Mineka, S. (2001). Fear, phobias and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108, 483-522
83. Penn, D. J., & Potts, W. K. (1999). The evolution of mating preferences and major histocompatibility complex genes. American Naturalist, 153, 145-164
84. Phillips, A. T., Wellman, H. M., & Spelke, E. S. (2002). Infants’ ability to connect gaze and emotional expression to intentional action. Cognition, 85, 53-78
85. Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
86. Platek, S. M., Burch, R. L., Panyavin, I. S., Wasserman, B. H., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2002). Reactions to children’s faces: Resemblance matters more for males than females. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 159-166
87. Platek, S. M., Critton, S. R., Burch, R. L., Frederick, D. A., Myers, T. E., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2003). How much resemblance is enough? Sex difference in reactions to resemblance, but not the ability to detect resemblance. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 81-87
88. Porter, R. H., & Moore, J. D. (1981). Human kin recognition by olfactory cues. Physiology and Behavior, 27, 493-495
89. Potts, W. K. (2002). Wisdom through immunogenetics. Nature Genetics, 30, 130-131
90. Povinelli, D. J. (2000). Folk physics for apes: The chimpanzee’s theory of how the world works. New York: Oxford University Press.
91. Rakison, D. H., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (2001). Developmental origin of the animate-inanimate distinction. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 209-228
92. Rochat, P., Morgan, R., & Carpenter, M. (1997). Young infants’ sensitivity to movement information specifying social causality. Cognitive Development, 12, 441-465
93. Rozin, P., Haidt, J., & McCauley, C. R. (2000). Disgust. In M. Lewis & J. Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp 637-653). New York: Guilford Press.
94. Scholl, B., & Tremoulet, P. (2000). Perceptual causality and animacy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 299-308
95. Shallice, T. (1988). From neuropsychology to mental structure. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
96. Shepher, J. (1971). Mate selection among second-generation kibbutz adolescents: Incest avoidance and negative imprinting. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1, 293-307
97. Smith, M. S., Kish, B. L., & Crawford, C. B. (1987). Inheritance of wealth as human kin investment. Ethology and Sociobiology, 8, 171-182
98. Sperber, D. (1994). The modularity of thought and the epidemiology of representations. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp 39-67). New York: Cambridge University Press.
99. Sperber, D. (2002). In defense of massive modularity. In E. Dupoux (Ed.), Language, brain and cognitive development: Essays in honor of Jacques Mehler (pp 47-57). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
100. Sperber, D. (2005). Modularity and relevance: How can a massively modular mind be flexible and contextsensitive? In P. Carruthers, S. Laurence, & S. Stich (Eds.), The innate mind: Structure and content (pp 53-68). Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
101. Sperber, D., Cara, F., & Girotto, V. (1995). Relevance theory explains the selection task. Cognition, 57, 31-95
102. Stone, V., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., Kroll, N., & Knight, R. (2002). Selective impairment of reasoning about social exchange in a patient with bilateral limbic system damage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(17), 11531-11536
103. Sugiyama, L., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2002). Cross-cultural evidence of cognitive adaptations for social exchange among the Shiwiar of Ecuadorian Amazonia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(17), 11537-11542
104. Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 675-735
105. Tremoulet, P. D., & Feldman, J. (2000). Perception of animacy from the motion of a single object. Perception, 29, 943-951
106. Trivers, R. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35-57
107. Walter, A., & Buyske, S. (2003). The Westermarck effect and early childhood co-socialization: Sex differences in inbreeding-avoidance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21, 353-365
108. Want, S. C., & Harris, P. L. (2001). Learning from other people’s mistakes: Causal understanding in learning to use a tool. Child Development, 72(2), 431-443
109. West-Eberhard, M. J. (2003). Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
110. Westermarck, E. A. (1921). The history of human marriage. London: Macmillan.
111. Wolf, A. P. (1995) Sexual attraction and childhood association: A Chinese brief for Edward Westermarck. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
112. Yamazaki, K., Beauchamp, G. K., Kupniewski, D., Bard, J., Thomas, L., & Boyse E. A. (1988). Familial imprinting determines H-2 selective mating preferences. Science, 240, 1331-1332
113. Young, A. W., Hellawell, D., & Hay, D. (1987). Configurational information in face perception. Perception, 16, 747-759.