Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2010: Vol 33 Index & Table of Contents

2010·1.7 MB·English

Contents Volume 33:1 February 2010
Coall, D. A. & Hertwig, R. Grandparental investment: Past, present,
and future
Open Peer Commentary Kaptijn, R. & Thomese, F. Fitness effects of
Broadfield, D. C. Grandparental investment and grandparental investments in contemporary
the epiphenomenon of menopause in recent low-risk societies
human history Kramer, K. L. Intergenerational transfers and the
Cox, D. Integrating evolutionary and social cost of allomothering in traditional societies
science approaches to the family Lee, R. D. Population aging and the economi
Euler, H. A. Is contemporary grandparental care role of the elderly: Bonanza or burden?
an evolutionary mismatch? Michalski, R. L. Measures of grandparental
Fantino, E. & Stolarz-Fantino, S$. Grandparental investment as a limiting factor in theoretical
altruism: Expanding the sense of cause and effect and empirical advancement
Faweett, T. W., van den Berg, P., Weissing, Pashos, A. The evolutionary versus socio-economi
F. J., Park, J. H. & Buunk, A. P. view on grandparenthood: What are the
Intergenerational conflict over grandparents’ underlying motivations?
grandparental investment Sear, R. & Dickins, T. E. The generation
Friedman, D. & Hechter, M. Motivating game is the cooperation game: The role of
grandparental investment grandparents in the timing of reproduction
Gurven, M. & Schniter, E. An evolutionary Strassman, B. I. & Kurapati, N. T. Are liumans
perspective can help unify disparate accounts of cooperative breeders?: Most studies of natural
grandparental investment fertility populations do not support the
Hames, R. Grandparental transfers and kin grandmother hypothesis
selection . Voracek, M., Tran, U. S. & Fisher, M. L.
Hoppmann, C, A. & Klumb, P. L. Grandparental Evolutionary psychology’s notion of differential
investment facilitates harmonization of work and grandparental investment and the Dodo Bird
family in employed parents: A lifespan Phenomenon Not evervone Can be nent]
psychological perspective
Huber, B. R. Continuity between pre- and Authors’ Response
post-demographic transition populations with Coall, D. A. & Hertwig, R. Toward an i
respect to grandparental investment framework of grandparental investment
Ce
Volume 33:2/3 April/June 2010 wit
Contents Dz
Sel
Dz
sin
lea
Fle
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J. & Norenzayan, A. An
Ha
The weirdest people in the world? 6]
nel
Hz
Open Peer Commentary Kesebir, S., Oishi, S. & Spellman, B. A.
cat
Astuti, R. & Bloch, M. Why a theory of human The socio-ecological approach turns variance He
nature cannot be based on the distinction among populations from a liability to an asset 96 of
between universality and variability: Lessons Khemlani, S. S., Lee, N. Y. L. & Ph
from anthropology Bucciarelli, M. Determinants of Hi
Baumard, N. & Sperber, D. Weird people, yes cognitive variability 97 Is
but also weird experiments Koneéni, V. J. Responsible behavioral science an
Bennis, W. M. & Medin, D. L. Weirdness is in generalizations and applications require much Hy
de
the eye of the beholder more than non-WEIRD samples 9S
Boesch, C. Away from ethnocentrism and Lancy, D. F. When nurture becomes nature: Jo
anthropocentrism: Towards a scientific Ethnocentrism in studies of human development 99 pe
understanding of “what makes us human” 86 Leavens, D. A., Bard, K. A. & Hopkins, W. D.
the
Ceci, S. J., Kahan, D. M. & Braman, D. BIZARRE chimpanzees do not represent “the
The WEIRD are even weirder than you think: chimpanzee” 100 M:
Diversifying contexts is as important as Machery, E. Explaining why experimental ust
diversifying s:a mples behavior varies across cultures: A missing step
Pps!
Chiao, J. Y. & Cheon, B. K. The weirdest in “The weirdest pe ople in the world?” LO] co
88
brains in the world Majid, A. & Levinson, S. C. W "I RD languages M:
Danks, D. & Rose, D. Diversity in have misled us, too 103 me
represent itions; uniformity in le:a rning 90 Maryanski, A. WEIRD societies may be more Mi
Fernald, A. Getting be yond the* ‘ convenience compatible with human nature 103 lat
sample” in research on early cognitive Meadon, M. & Spurrett, D. It’s not just the M:
development oI subjects — there are too many WEIRD researchers 104
ne
Fessler, D. M. T. Cultural congruence between Panchanathan, K., Frankenhuis, W. E. &
investigators and participants masks the unknown Barrett, H. C. Development: Evolutionary
unknowns: Shame research as an example 92 ecology’s midwife 105
Gichter, S. (Dis)advantages of student subjects: Rai, T. S. & Fiske, A. ODD (observation- and
What is your research question? 92 description-deprived) psychological research 106
Gaertner, L., Sedikides, C., Cai, H. & Rochat, P. What is really wrong with a priori
Brown, J. a It’s not WEIRD. it's WRONG: claims of universality? S: ampling, validity, process
When Researchers Overlook uNderlying level, and the irresistible drive to reduce 107
Genotypes, they will not detect universal Rozin, P. The weirdest people in the world are
processes a harbinger of the future of the world LOS
Gosling, S. D., Sandy, C. J., John, O. P. & Shweder, R. A. Donald Campbell's doubt:
Potter, J. Wired but not WEIRD: Cultural difference or failure of communication? LO9
The promise of the Internet in reaching more Stich, S$. Philosophy and WEIRD intuition 110
diverse samples 94
Karasik, L. B., Adolph, K. E., Authors’ Response 11]
Tamis-LeMonda, C. S. & Bornstein, M. H. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J. & Norenzayan, A.
WEIRD walking: Cross-cultural research on Beyond WEIRD: Towards a broad-based
motor development 95 behavioral science th
Ge
un
Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., van der Maas, H. L. J. & Borsboom, D. an
H:
Comorbidity: A network perspective
H:
Open Peer Commentary Bornstein, R. F. The rocky road from
Belzung, C., Billette de Villemeur, E., Axis I to Axis II: Extending the network Jcoa
Lemoine, M. & Camus, V. Latent variables model of diagnostic comorbidity to
fal
and the network perspective 150 personality’ pathology
in
a—ee of
Cervone, D. Aligning psychological assessment Ross, D. Some mental disorders are based on
with psye ‘hologic: il science networks, others on latent variables 166
Danks, D., Fanesali, $., Glymour, C. & Rothenberger, A., Banaschewski, T., Becker,
Scheines, R. Comorbid science? A. & Roessner, V. Comorbidity: The case of
Davis, O. S. P. & Plomin, R. Visualizing genetic deve lopme ntal psve hopat hology 67
similarity at the symptom level: The example of Rubinsten, O. & Henik, A. Comorbidity
learning disabilities Cognition and biology count! 16S
Fleeson, W., Furr, R. M. & Arnold, E. M. Staniloiu, A. & Markowitsch, H. J. Looking at
An agenda for symptom-based research comorbidity through the glasses of neuroscientific
Haig, B. D. & Vertue, F. M. Extending the memory research: A brain-network perspective 170
network perspective on comorbidity Tzur-Bitan, D., Meiran, N. & Shahar, G.
Haslam, N. Symptom networks and psychiatric The importance of modeling comorbidity using
categories 158 an intra-individual, time-series ipproac h 172
Hood, S. B. & Lovett, B. J. Network models van der Sluis, $., Kan, K.-J. & Dolan, C. V.
of psychopathology and comorbidity: Consequences ofa network view for genetic
Philosophical and pragmatic considerations 159 association studies
Humphry, S. M. & McGrane, J. A. van Geert, P. L. C. & Steenbeek, H
Is there a contradiction between the network Networks as complex dynamic systems: Applications
and latent variable perspectives? 160 to clinical and developmental psycholog
Hyland, M. E. Network origins of anxiety and and psychopathology |
depression 16] Wass, S. & Karmiloff-Smith, A. Th: HIISSI
Johnson, W. & Perke, The network
developmental dimension In = net ork
perspective will help, but is comorbidity perspective
the question? Yordanova, J., Kolev, V., Kirov, R. &
Krueger, R. F., DeYoung, C. G. & Rother berger, A. Comorbidity in th
Markon, K. E. Toward scientifically context of neural network properties 176
useful quantitative models of Zachar, P. The abandonment of latent
psychopathology: The importance of a variables: Philosophical considerations
comparative approach
Markus, K. A. Questions about networks, Authors’ Response
measurement, and causation 164 Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J.,
McFarland, D. J. & Malta, L. §. Symptoms as van der Maas, H. L. J. & oe D.
latent variables 165 Comple x realities re quire com pl x theories
Molenaar, P. C. M. Latent variable models are Refining and extending the network
network models 166° approach to mental disorders S
Machery, E. Précis of Doing without Concepts
Open Peer Commentary
Keil, F. Hybrid Vigo} and CONCE ptua structure
Blanchard, T. Default knowledge, time pressure, Khemlani, S. §. & Goodwin, G. The function
and the theory-theory of concepts 206 and representation of concepts 216
Couchman, 5. i Boomer, J., Coutinho, Lalumera, E. (¢ oncepts are a functional kind
M. V. C. & Smith, J. D. Carving nature at Lombrozo, T. From conceptual representations
its joints using a knife called concepts 207 to explanatory relations 1S
Danks, D. Not different kinds, just special Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. Concepts and .
208 theoretical unificetion 19
cases
Dove, G. An additional heterogeneity hypothesis 209 Markman, A. B. Where ar nature S JOINTS?
Edwards, K. Unity amidst heterogeneity in Finding the mechanisms underlying
theories of conce pts 210 categorization 220)
Gonnerman, C. & Weinberg, J. M. Two Rey, .G. Concepts versus conceptions (again 22
uneliminated uses for “ concepts”: Hybrids Samuels, R. & Ferreira, M. Why don't
and guides for inquiry concepts constitute a natural kind?
Hampton, J. A. Concept talk cannot be avoided Scarantino, A. Evidence of coordination
Harnard, S. Eliminating the “concept” concept bbbwov woe as a cure tor concept eliminativism }
Hayes, B. K. & Kearney, L. Defending the Schneider, S. Conceptual atomism rethought 224
concept of “concepts” Strohminger, N. & Moore, B. W. Banishing
Jacobson, A. J. The faux, fake, forged, false, the thought a
fabricated, and phony: Problems for the Virtel, J. & Piccinini, G. Are prototypes
independence of similarity-based theories and exemplars used in distinct cognitive
of concepts bo ut pre cesses? ==0
Vlach, H. A., Krogh, L., Thom, E. E. & Zaki, S. & Cruz, J. Parsimony and the
Sandhofer, C. M. Doing with development: triple-system model of c« meepts 230
Moving toward a complete theory of concepts
Weiskopf, D. A. The theoretical indispensability Author’s Response
298
of concepts Machery, E. The heterogeneity of
Yermolayeva, Y. & Rakison, D. H. Developing knowledge representation and the
without concepts 229 elimination of concept boW w
m
Contents Volume 33:4 August 2010
Anderson, M. L. Neural reuse: A fundamental
organizational principle of the brain
bo— _ Ul
Open Peer Commentary Kiverstein, J. No bootstrapping without
Aisenberg, D. & Henik, A. Reuse or re-function? 266 semantic inheritance ) iv(
Bargh, J. A., Williams, L. E., Huang, J. Y., Song, Klein, C. Redeployed functions versus
H. & Ackerman, J. M. From the physical to spreading activation: A potential confound 2SO
the psychological: Mundane experiences Lia, B. Implications of neural reuse for brain
influence social judgment and interpersonal injury therapy: Historical note on the work
behavior 267 of Kurt Goldstein ) S|
Bergeron, V. Neural reuse and cognitive Lindblom, B. Reuse in the brain and elsewh re + 2
homology 268 Michaux, N., Pesenti, M., Badets, A
Bridgeman, B. Neural reuse implies Di Luca, S. & Andres, M. Let us redeploy
distributed coding 269 attention to sensorimotor experience
Brincker, M. Sensorimotor grounding wad. Moore, D. S. & Moore, C. Neural reuse as
reused cognitive domains Z1O a source of deve lopme nt ;a o oY
Dekker, T. M. & Karmiloff-Smith, A Niven, J. E. & Chittka, L. Reuse of identified
The importance of ontogenetic change in typical neurons in multiple neural circuits
and atypical development 27] Petrov, A. A., Jilk, D. J. & O'Reilly, RC.
Donnarumma, F., Prevete, R. & Trautteur, G. The Leabra architecture: Specialization without
How and over what timescales does neural reuse modularity
actually occur? 272 ~Rabaglia, C. D. & Marcus, G. F. Neural reus
Fishbein, W., Lau, H., DeJestis, R. & and human individual differences .
Alger, S. E. Sleep, neural reuse, and Reimers, M. Reuse of molecules and of neural
memory consolidation processes 2G circuits
Foglia, L. & Grush, R. Reuse (neural, bodily, Ritchie, J. B. & Carruthers, P. Massive modularit
and environmental) as a fundamental organizational is consistent with most forms of neural reus¢
principle of human cognition 274 Rozin, P. More than modularity and met iphor
Gomila, A. & Calvo, P. Understanding brain The power of preadaptation and access
circuits and their dynamics 274 Speed, A., Verzi, S. J., Wagner, J. S. &
Immordino-Yang, M. H., Chiao, J. Y. & Warrender, C. Optical holography as an
Fiske, A. P. Neural reuse in the social and analogue for a neural reuse mechanism
emotional brain 275 Toskos Dils, A. & Flusberg, S. J. Massive
Iriki, A. Neural reuse: A poly semous and redeployment or distributed — rity?
redundant biological system subserving Vilarroya, O. Belling the cat: Why reus«
niche-construction 276 the ory is not « mnough *)
Jungé, J. A. & Dennett, D. C. Multi-use and
constraints from original use 277 Author’s Reponse
Katz, P. S. Comparative studies provide Anderson, M. L. Cortex and context
evidence for neural reuse 278 Response to commentaries on neural reus¢ O4
Knobe, J. Person as scientist, person as moralist
3
Open Peer Commentary Brogaard, B. “Stupid people deserve what
Alexander, J., Mallon, R. & Weinberg, J. M. they get”: The effects of personality assessment
Competence: What's in? What’s out? Who knows? 329 on judgments of intentional action
Alicke, M. & Rose, D. Culpable control Carpendale, J. I. M., Hammond, S. I. &
or moral concepts? 330 Lewis, C. The social origin and moral naturé
Baldo, M. V. C. & Barberousse, A. Person of human thinking
as moralist and scientist 331] Cova, F., Dupoux, E. & Jacob, P. Moral
Bartsch, K. & Young, T. N. Reasoning evaluation shapes linguistic reports of others
asymmetries do not invalidate theory-- the ‘ory 331 psychological states, not theory-of-mind judgments
Egré, P. Qualitative judgments, quantitative Mandelbaum, E. & Ripley, D. Expectations
judgments, and norm-sensitivity Ww ee)U t and morality: A dilemma 346
Gintis, H. Modalities of word usage in Menzies, P. Norms, causes, and
intentionality and causality alternative possibilities 346
Girotto, V., Surian, L. & Siegal, M. Morals, Nanay, B. Ne ither moralists, nor scientists:
beliefs, and counterfactuals GW We are counterfac tually reasoning animals 347
Guglielmo, S. Questioning the influence Scanlon, T. M. Ambiguity of “intention” 348
of moral judgment Sinnott-Armstrong, W. Alternatives and defaults:
Hindriks, F. Person as lawyer: How having Knobe’s two explanations of how moral judgments Jo
a guilty mind explains attributions influence intuitions about intentionality
of intentiona | age NC\ and causation
Or
Humphrey, N. Person as moral scientist Spurrett, D. & Martin, J. “Very like a whale”
Kang, M. J. & Glassman, M. The cultural Analogies about the mind need salient simil: ity Be
capital of the moralist and the scientist to convey information evi
Kreps, T. A. & Monin, B. Are mental states Stich, S$. & Wysocki, T. Are we really moralizing Be
assessed relative to what most people “should” creatures through and through? Bi
or “would” think? Prescriptive and descriptive Terroni, L. & Fraguas, R. Depression of |
cKousmhpnoinre,n tsT. o&f Cexhpeercntyead k,a ttiNt.u dUesn derstanding aUflfaetcotiwnsgk i,m orJa.l &j uJdoghmnesnotn , J. Fixing the default ooU lb o EBlle
the adult moralist requires first understanding position in Knobe’s competence model kin
Ut bo
the child scientist Ge
Levy, N. Scientists and the folk have to.
the same concepts Author’s Response
Lombrozo, T. & Uttich, K Putting normativity Knobe, J. The person as moralist account
in its proper place Ww pam and its alternatives wwU t wo
Contents Volume 33:5 October 2010
Jones, D. Human kinship, from conceptual structure to grammar 367
Open Peer Commentary Liu, C., Ge, Y., Mai, X. & Luo, Y.-J. Exploring
Behme, C. Does kinship terminology provide the conceptual and semantic structure of human
evidence for or against universal grammar? kinship: An experimental ] investigation of Chines:
Bennardo, G. Space, kinship, and mind kin terms 392
Biro, T. Will Optimality Theory colonize all Lyon, S. M. Genealogy kinship and knowledge
of higher cognition? A cautionary note about causation 94
Bloch, M. Kinship terms are not kinship McConvell, P. Getting the constraints right 94
El Guindi, F. The cognitive path through Miers, P. Typ]o logigc al variation of kinship
kinship terminologies is a function of strict ranking of
Gerkey, D. & Cronk, L. Why do we need constraints on nested binary classification trees 95
to coordinate when classifying kin? Musgrave, S. & Dowe, D. L. Kinship
Hogeweg, L., Legendre, G. & Smolensky, P. optim ay!a nd typology 7
Kinship terminology: polysemy or categoriz: ition? 386 Nevins, A. The applicability of theories of
Hudson, R. Concé »ptual structure is constrained ane il contrast to kinship systems 398
functionally, not formally Read, D. W. The algebraic logic of kinship
Jordan, F. M. & Dunn, M. Kin term diversity is terminology structures 99
the result of multilevel, historical processes Salazar, C. Ge; nealogy (and t1 he re latias onship
Kay, P. t facts of Seneca kinship semantics between opposite-sex/same-sex sibling pairs
Knight, C. Language and kinship: We need some is what kinship is all about (|
Darwinian theory here Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. Th« Sh] ared |
Kronenfeld, D. B. Conceptual implications of evolutionary histor of kinship classific ations
kinship terminological systems: Special problems and language ; 1()2
and multiple analytic approaches 390 Wierzbicka, A . Lexical universals of kinship
Leaf, M. J. Pragmatic and positivistic analyses and social cognition 103
of kinship terminology 390
Levinson, §. C. Advancing our grasp of
constrained variation in a crucial cognitive Author’s Response
domain 39] Jones, D. Thinking about kinship and thinking 104
Contents Volume 33:6 December 2010
Niedenthal, P. M., Mermillod, M., Maringer, M. & Hess, U.
_ The Simulation of Smiles (SIMS) model: Embodied simulation
and the meaning of facial expression 417
Open Peer Commentary Huang, L. & Galinsky, A. D. No mirrors for the
Alibali, M. W. & Hostetter, A. B. Mimicry and powerful: Why dominant smiles are not processed
simulation in gesture comprehension using embodied simulation
Bartlett, M. S. Emotion simulation and expression Kiverstein, J. & Zamuner, E. Could embodied
understanding: A case for time simulation be a by-product of emotion perception?
Basso, F. & Oullier, O. “Smile down the phone”: Lakens, D. & Ruys, K. I. The dynamic
Extending-the effects of smiles to vocal interaction of conceptual and e »mbodied knowle dge
social interactions Liu, C., Ge, Y., Luo, W.-B. & Luo, Y.-J. Show your
Bouissac, P. Expressive’ smiles or leucosignals? teeth or not: The role of the mouth and eyes in
Brinol, P., DeMarree, K. G. & Smith, R smiles and its cross-cultural variations
The role of embodied change in perceiving and Lobmaier, J. S. & Fischer, M. H. Motivational
processing facial expressions of others aspects of recognizing a smile
Caldara, R. Beyond smiles: The impact of Mann, T. A. & Choe, Y. Grounding the meaning
culture and race in embodying and decoding of non-prototypical smiles on motor lehnolee
facial expressions Mehu, M. & N’Diaye, K. The proximate
Centorrino, S., Djemai, E., Hopfensitz, A,, mechanisms and ultimate functions of smiles
Milinski, M. & Seabright, P. Honest smiles as a Morsella, E., Montemayor, C., Hubbard, J. &
costly signal in social exchange Zarolia, P. Conceptual knowledge: Grounded in
Chakrabarti, B. E yes, amy od: ila, and other sensorimotor states, or a disembodied
models of face processing: Que stions for the deus ex machina?
SIMS model Ohala, J. J. What’s behind the smile?
Chang, B. & Vermeulen, N. Re-thinking Sauter, D. A. & Levinson, $. C. What's embodied
the causes, processes, and consequences of in a smile?
simulation Senju, A. & Johnson, M. H. Is eye contact the
Chatelle, C., Laureys, S., Majerus, S. & key to the social brain?
Schnakers, C. Eye gaze and conscious Simpson, E. & Fragaszy, D. Can we really
processing in severely brain-injured patients leave gender out of it? Individual differences
Conty, L., Grezes, J. & Sander, D. How does and the Simulation of Smiles model
perceiving eye direction modulate emotion Swain, J. E. & Ho, S. S. Baby smile response
recognition? circuits of the parental brain
Covas-Smith, C. M., Fine, J., Glenberg, A. M., Vigil, J. M. & Coulombe, P. Embodied simulation
Keylor, E., Li, Y. J., Marsh, E., Osborne, and the search for meaning are not necessary for
E. A., Soliman, T. & Yee, C. Cultural variations facial expression processing
on the SIMS model Winkielman, P. Embodied and disembodied
Evers, K., Noens, I., Steyaert, J. & processing of emotional expressions: Insights from
Wagemans, J. Embodied simulation and the Autism Spectrum Disorders
meaning of facial expression in autism
Fernandez-Dols, J.-M. & Pilar Carrera, P.
Le bon dieu est dans le detail: 1s smiling the Authors’ Response
* recognition of happiness? Niedenthal, P. M., Mermillod, M..,
Hamon-Hill, C. & Barresi, J. Does motor Maringer, M. & Hess, U. The future of SIMS:
mimicry contribute to emotion recognition? Who embodies which smile and when?