AN216 Flashcards
Cosmides and Tobby - Origins of Domain Specificity
Domain- specific mechanisms evolved to face problems of Pleistocene hunter and gatherers - nutritional regulation, incest avoidsnce, sexual jealousy , predator
- proof the special food module proposal
- humans manifest caution around snakes and spiders even if they were never bitten
- also for predator avoidance- very young children make distinctions between bio and not bio motion
Cole on schooling influences
- In 70s modified Luria’s classic syllogism experiment so that the illiterate peasants did not have to infer an answer to it but agree or disagree with researcher - effect disappears!! Does not involve you directly telling what you did not see!! You can agree assuming the researcher saw it.
- IN 90s conducted a “backward” cross cultural study - Kpelle and americans asked to estimate number of kopi (measuring cups) in a bowl
karmiloff smith
Integrates nativist and constructivist theories in a theory of conceptual change
- prespecified anátomical structures, but vast nr of connections between cells constructed post natally
- brain can develop differently through embryogenesis
- WS - genetic disorder - problems with pro solving, spatial recogniton, feature-by-feature processing rather than holistic- actually better at recognising upsidown faces
- specialisation of areas of brain occurs relatively late
samuels (2004)
Innateness in cognitive science - psychological primitiveness - innate are those which are acquired through lower biological levels
(M) - when does psychological come in? As we specialise in faces already psychology right?
Pinker (1994) quote
Whole problem with reconciliation of psycho with anthro :
“ hates relativism (…) more than anything else, maybe excepting fiberglass powerboats(…) as it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, the fixed structure of human nature”
- but not everything is relative and not everything fixed! - both extreme relativists and pinker are wrong
premack & woodruff (1978)
sarah shown videos of humans solving problems and was able to select appropriate solution from photographs
- concluded she can infer motivational states - but she could think what would I do
- ‘good solution’ favorite keith bad for bill - but maybe hmm shat would I like them to do depending on my liking !! Yet to my mind if they legitimately though it mattered they must have known they have feelings,want to solve the problem etc
- maybe teaching developed theory of mind?
seyfarth & cheney (2000)
baboons and vervet monkeys posses knowledge of them and others in social relations
- look at monkey related to voice from loudspeaker
- a fear bark from mother never comes when lower rank approaches
- claim understanding derives from observations + monkeys, unlike humans unaware if it …- me - language?
Flavell (2004)
Theory theorists - TOM developed through experience, child builds it revising it with experience
Bartsch & Wellman (1995) - evidence changes from desires to believes
- counter - Baillargeon - spontaneoys response
- modularity theorists - domain specific mechanisms, experience might be necessary to trigger but does not determine nature.
repacholi & Gopnik 1997
By 18m infants get they should give experimenter food they react to with pleasure and not one they would prefer
Woodman & Markman 1998
Children recognise by 18m adult is referring to word of adults not the childs concentration
Liszkowski (2006)
Already at 12 m infants point to objects displaced from interlocutors sight showing an understanding that state of belief can differ
Firth & Firth (1999)
Used brain imaging to suggest superior posterior temporal sulcus responsible for detecting biomotion
- specificity of biological motion detection also in monkeys but also face recognition!
Lilliard (1997)
Argues against universal tom . Neglects very intention of pritchard. Self- destroys argument by saying “ person practices witchcraft against them because he or she is envious” implies they attribute casualty to intentional witchcraft of others.
School & Leslie (1999)
Lilliards view pertains to inessential flourescence of mature tom competence, rather than essential character in early acquisition
Me - she talks about conscious reflections about the mind. Explicit theory of mind ( astuti,2012)
fajans (1985)
After fieldwork among baining of png , a society with opacity of the mind concluded they do not posses tom
Different ages of bio/social dualism acquisition
solomon 1996 - euroamerican not until 7
Replicated together with bloch and carey in zafimary to find not until adulthood.
mahalingham 1998 - middle class tamil not until 12
Ape culture
E.g population specific tool use. Some fish for termites using sticks and others scoop up handfuls after destroying moulds ( tomasello 1999)
Imitation vs emulation + chimp study
Imitation - pay attention to intention, to the ‘teachers’ action
Emulation- paying attention to context and means to end result
Tomasello et al 1993 chimps presented with tool to obtain out of reach subject and 2 ways with which to use it - one with superflous additional actions. While child will always copy the one demonstrated, the chimp will opt for the efficient
Shared intentionality
Motivation to share psychological states with whom they idenify
Whiten et al 2009 ghost studies
Chimps learn to use a new device when it is operated by another chimp, but not a fishing rope !
- lead tomasello to change his mind regarding learning among chimps - not same if mum shows as if ‘ wind blows a log’ to reveal ants
Gergely & Csibra (2006)
Both strategies used by chimps and children only different requirements of cultural transmission favoured one ofer the other in each case
Ape culture - mostly consists of cognitively transparent elements
Human culture - culturally opaque with no transparent, immediate usefulness - language, you must attach a completely unrelated symbol to concept for it to gain meaning
Horner & Whiten 2005
Chimps imitated blindly an action of poking an opaque box to release food, but ceased when the box was transparent revealing it had no cause at all.
gergely 2002 - hand head study
Only 21 % of 14 month olds imitated an agent turning on light with head when they saw that their hands where clearly constrained (they were wrapped in blanket pretending to be cold ) and as much as 69% when unconstrained
- the head movement imitation in hands free even greater with pedagogical cues
Csibra (2007) teachers in the wild
- some ants intentionally guide, yes along with slowing down and stopping, others so they can memorise route
- meerkats ‘scaffold’ environment for their pups to learn - giving scorpions to kill with different degrees of disability to the scorpion depending on pups age and abilities.
