Hunter-Gatherer Olfaction Is Special. Asifa Majid, Nicole Kruspe. Current Biology, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.12.014 |
Highlights
• People struggle to name odors, but this limitation is not universal
• Is superior olfactory performance due to subsistence, ecology or language family?
• Hunter-gatherers and non-hunter-gatherers from the same environment were compared
• Only hunter-gatherers were proficient odor namers, showing subsistence is crucial
Summary: People struggle to name odors [1, 2, 3, 4]. This has been attributed to a diminution of olfaction in trade-off to vision [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. This presumption has been challenged recently by data from the hunter-gatherer Jahai who, unlike English speakers, find odors as easy to name as colors [4]. Is the superior olfactory performance among the Jahai because of their ecology (tropical rainforest), their language family (Aslian), or because of their subsistence (they are hunter-gatherers)? We provide novel evidence from the hunter-gatherer Semaq Beri and the non-hunter-gatherer (swidden-horticulturalist) Semelai that subsistence is the critical factor. Semaq Beri and Semelai speakers—who speak closely related languages and live in the tropical rainforest of the Malay Peninsula—took part in a controlled odor- and color-naming experiment. The swidden-horticulturalist Semelai found odors much more difficult to name than colors, replicating the typical Western finding. But for the hunter-gatherer Semaq Beri odor naming was as easy as color naming, suggesting that hunter-gatherer olfactory cognition is special.
Thursday, February 8, 2018
Why do boys and girls make different educational choices? The influence of expected earnings and test scores
Why do boys and girls make different educational choices? The influence of expected earnings and test scores. Benoît Rapoport, Claire Thibout. Economics of Education Review, Volume 62, February 2018, Pages 205-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.09.006
Highlights
• Expected earnings drive the educational choices of boys more so than for girls.
• Girls generally place less value on their test scores in Sciences than boys.
• The gender gap in high school course choices is higher for pupils at the same level in Mathematics and Humanities.
• The gender gap in high school is mainly due to differences in valuation of test scores.
• The gender gap in higher education choices largely come from differences in tastes or norms.
Abstract: Girls frequently choose educational pathways that lead to lower-paid jobs and less prestigious careers, despite performing as well as boys at school. Using a cohort of French pupils, we estimate a model of educational choices in which the anticipated cost of choosing a pathway depends on the skills in each subject and is allowed to differ between boys and girls. We show that choices in high school and in higher education are partly driven by expected earnings for boys but less for girls. Boys choose more often courses with a component in Sciences and competitive pathways. In high school, gender differences are higher for pupils at the same level in Mathematics and Humanities and are largely due to differences in marginal impact of test scores, which are lower for girls. In higher education, while partly driven by test scores, choices seem to largely depend on other gender differences (tastes, norms).
Highlights
• Expected earnings drive the educational choices of boys more so than for girls.
• Girls generally place less value on their test scores in Sciences than boys.
• The gender gap in high school course choices is higher for pupils at the same level in Mathematics and Humanities.
• The gender gap in high school is mainly due to differences in valuation of test scores.
• The gender gap in higher education choices largely come from differences in tastes or norms.
Abstract: Girls frequently choose educational pathways that lead to lower-paid jobs and less prestigious careers, despite performing as well as boys at school. Using a cohort of French pupils, we estimate a model of educational choices in which the anticipated cost of choosing a pathway depends on the skills in each subject and is allowed to differ between boys and girls. We show that choices in high school and in higher education are partly driven by expected earnings for boys but less for girls. Boys choose more often courses with a component in Sciences and competitive pathways. In high school, gender differences are higher for pupils at the same level in Mathematics and Humanities and are largely due to differences in marginal impact of test scores, which are lower for girls. In higher education, while partly driven by test scores, choices seem to largely depend on other gender differences (tastes, norms).
Self-Control in Chimpanzees Relates to General Intelligence (As It Seems to Happen in Humans)
Self-Control in Chimpanzees Relates to General Intelligence. Michael J. Beran, William D. Hopkins. Current Biology, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.12.043
Highlights
• In humans, delay of gratification appears to be related to general intelligence
• Chimpanzees completed an intelligence test and a test of delay of gratification
• Intelligence scores were most closely related to delay-of-gratification efficiency
• Factors that loaded most strongly on g scores were most related to delay scores
Summary: For humans, there appears to be a clear link between general intelligence and self-control behavior, such as sustained delay of gratification [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. Chimpanzees also delay gratification [10, 11, 12] and can be given tests of general intelligence (g) [13, 14, 15], but these two constructs have never been compared within the same sample of nonhuman animals. We presented 40 chimpanzees with the hybrid delay task (HDT) [16, 17], which measures inter-temporal choices and the capacity for sustained delay of gratification, and the primate cognitive test battery (PCTB), which measures g in chimpanzees [13, 14, 15]. Importantly, none of the sub-tasks in the PCTB directly assesses self-control or other forms of behavioral inhibition. Rather, they assess areas of physical cognition (e.g., quantity discrimination) or social cognition (e.g., gaze following). In three phases of testing, we consistently found that the strongest relation was between chimpanzee g scores and efficiency in the HDT. Chimpanzee g was not most closely related to the proportion of trials the chimpanzees chose to try to wait for delayed rewards, but rather most closely related to how good they were at waiting for those rewards when they chose to do so. We also found the same strong relation between HDT efficiency and those factors in the PCTB that loaded most strongly on chimpanzee g. These results highlight that, as with humans, there is a strong relation between chimpanzees’ self-control and overall intelligence—a relation that likely reflects the role of successful inhibitory control during cognitive processing of information and intelligent decision-making.
Highlights
• In humans, delay of gratification appears to be related to general intelligence
• Chimpanzees completed an intelligence test and a test of delay of gratification
• Intelligence scores were most closely related to delay-of-gratification efficiency
• Factors that loaded most strongly on g scores were most related to delay scores
Summary: For humans, there appears to be a clear link between general intelligence and self-control behavior, such as sustained delay of gratification [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. Chimpanzees also delay gratification [10, 11, 12] and can be given tests of general intelligence (g) [13, 14, 15], but these two constructs have never been compared within the same sample of nonhuman animals. We presented 40 chimpanzees with the hybrid delay task (HDT) [16, 17], which measures inter-temporal choices and the capacity for sustained delay of gratification, and the primate cognitive test battery (PCTB), which measures g in chimpanzees [13, 14, 15]. Importantly, none of the sub-tasks in the PCTB directly assesses self-control or other forms of behavioral inhibition. Rather, they assess areas of physical cognition (e.g., quantity discrimination) or social cognition (e.g., gaze following). In three phases of testing, we consistently found that the strongest relation was between chimpanzee g scores and efficiency in the HDT. Chimpanzee g was not most closely related to the proportion of trials the chimpanzees chose to try to wait for delayed rewards, but rather most closely related to how good they were at waiting for those rewards when they chose to do so. We also found the same strong relation between HDT efficiency and those factors in the PCTB that loaded most strongly on chimpanzee g. These results highlight that, as with humans, there is a strong relation between chimpanzees’ self-control and overall intelligence—a relation that likely reflects the role of successful inhibitory control during cognitive processing of information and intelligent decision-making.
Domains of Motivation in Men and Women for Initiating and Terminating Procreation in an Evolutionary Perspective
Domains of Motivation in Men and Women for Initiating and Terminating Procreation in an Evolutionary Perspective. Menelaos Apostolou & Maria Hadjimarkou. Marriage & Family Review, https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2017.1414723
ABSTRACT: Children require considerable resources such as time and money to be raised. Still, despite the heavy costs involved, most people do decide to have children, a fact that raises the question of what motivates them to do so. Moreover, after having one or more children, people decide not to have additional ones, even though they might still be fertile. This raises the question of what motivates people to terminate procreation. The present paper aims to address these questions using a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. In Study 1, we used in-depth interviews and open-ended questionnaires that lead to the identification of 66 reasons for which people have children and 23 reasons for which people stop having children. In Study 2, we used principal component analysis that classified these reasons in broader motivation domains, 15 for procreating and 4 for terminating procreation. Sex differences were examined in each domain. By placing procreation in an evolutionary framework, this study aims to provide a deeper understanding of the motives that drive people toward and away from the process of having children.
KEYWORDS: motives for having children, motives for stop having children, procreation, reasons for having children
ABSTRACT: Children require considerable resources such as time and money to be raised. Still, despite the heavy costs involved, most people do decide to have children, a fact that raises the question of what motivates them to do so. Moreover, after having one or more children, people decide not to have additional ones, even though they might still be fertile. This raises the question of what motivates people to terminate procreation. The present paper aims to address these questions using a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. In Study 1, we used in-depth interviews and open-ended questionnaires that lead to the identification of 66 reasons for which people have children and 23 reasons for which people stop having children. In Study 2, we used principal component analysis that classified these reasons in broader motivation domains, 15 for procreating and 4 for terminating procreation. Sex differences were examined in each domain. By placing procreation in an evolutionary framework, this study aims to provide a deeper understanding of the motives that drive people toward and away from the process of having children.
KEYWORDS: motives for having children, motives for stop having children, procreation, reasons for having children
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
