https://www.scivillage.com/ Thu, 06 Aug 2026 04:15:40 +0000 MyBB https://www.scivillage.com/thread-21028.html Wed, 05 Aug 2026 15:47:18 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-21028.html We can’t just lie about sex differences
https://www.skeptic.com/article/is-evolu...fferences/

INTRO: In this conversation with Timur Sevincer and Nikil Mukerji, Steve Stewart-Williams, author of the new book A Billion Years of Sex Differences, discusses what evolutionary psychology actually claims, how the field can deepen our understanding of human nature, where the field has gone wrong, why the charge of pseudoscience misses the target, and how skeptics should respond when real science becomes politically unwelcome.

EXCERPT... Nikil Mukerji: Some findings in evolutionary psychology are bound to annoy people, especially in certain political milieus. Are you concerned that this kind of science might play into the wrong hands? How do you deal with the ethics of communicating sex differences?

Steve Stewart-Williams: Claims about sex differences can certainly be misused if people exaggerate the size of the differences, or if people infer that, because a difference has an evolutionary basis, it’s therefore good or should be preserved. That can do harm. If we exaggerate differences, we may lower our expectations for one sex in certain domains.

To this issue I have two responses. First, the sexes do differ on average, and I think there’s an evolutionary contribution to some of those differences. We can’t just lie about that. The right response is to tell the truth carefully and responsibly.

That means emphasizing that most human sex differences aren’t huge. There’s a lot of overlap between the sexes. Everyone should get a fair chance. And the fact that something is natural, genetic, or partly shaped by evolution has no direct moral implications.

Second, denial can also do harm. It’s not the case that exaggerating sex differences is dangerous while minimizing them is harmless. We can get this wrong in both directions... (MORE - details)]]> We can’t just lie about sex differences
https://www.skeptic.com/article/is-evolu...fferences/

INTRO: In this conversation with Timur Sevincer and Nikil Mukerji, Steve Stewart-Williams, author of the new book A Billion Years of Sex Differences, discusses what evolutionary psychology actually claims, how the field can deepen our understanding of human nature, where the field has gone wrong, why the charge of pseudoscience misses the target, and how skeptics should respond when real science becomes politically unwelcome.

EXCERPT... Nikil Mukerji: Some findings in evolutionary psychology are bound to annoy people, especially in certain political milieus. Are you concerned that this kind of science might play into the wrong hands? How do you deal with the ethics of communicating sex differences?

Steve Stewart-Williams: Claims about sex differences can certainly be misused if people exaggerate the size of the differences, or if people infer that, because a difference has an evolutionary basis, it’s therefore good or should be preserved. That can do harm. If we exaggerate differences, we may lower our expectations for one sex in certain domains.

To this issue I have two responses. First, the sexes do differ on average, and I think there’s an evolutionary contribution to some of those differences. We can’t just lie about that. The right response is to tell the truth carefully and responsibly.

That means emphasizing that most human sex differences aren’t huge. There’s a lot of overlap between the sexes. Everyone should get a fair chance. And the fact that something is natural, genetic, or partly shaped by evolution has no direct moral implications.

Second, denial can also do harm. It’s not the case that exaggerating sex differences is dangerous while minimizing them is harmless. We can get this wrong in both directions... (MORE - details)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-21021.html Mon, 03 Aug 2026 14:26:07 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-21021.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1138157

EXCERPTS: What enables us to sustain effort toward goals, even when the task becomes increasingly difficult? A recent study by researchers at Nagoya University in Japan revealed the underlying brain mechanism, showing that orexin neurons play a crucial role in driving and regulating motivated behavior. The findings were published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS).

Motivational deficits, including loss of motivation, are often seen in mental disorders such as depression, addiction and ADHD. However, the brain mechanisms behind these problems remain largely unclear.

The research team, led by Hiroyuki Mizoguchi, associate professor, and Kiyofumi Yamada, professor emeritus, at Nagoya University's Graduate School of Medicine, focused on orexin neurons. These neurons regulate essential physiological functions such as sleep, appetite and energy expenditure. Although recent studies suggest that orexin neurons also influence motivation, their exact role has remained unclear.

[...] suppressing orexin neurons impaired motivation, but artificially exciting them beyond natural levels did not enhance it. The researchers say this asymmetry suggests orexin neurons are necessary for sustaining motivated behavior, though simply raising their activity may not be sufficient to increase it. Further studies are needed to determine what governs this effect, such as the duration or pattern of orexin neuron activity.

Mizoguchi concluded, "Our study demonstrated significant changes in orexin neuron activity depending on expected rewards and the effort required, suggesting a potential mechanism for translating expectations into sustained action."

Future research will investigate the input and output circuits connected to orexin neurons. A deeper understanding of orexin function may inform new approaches to addressing motivational deficits, including loss of motivation or challenges in sustaining goal-directed behavior. (MORE - missing details, no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1138157

EXCERPTS: What enables us to sustain effort toward goals, even when the task becomes increasingly difficult? A recent study by researchers at Nagoya University in Japan revealed the underlying brain mechanism, showing that orexin neurons play a crucial role in driving and regulating motivated behavior. The findings were published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS).

Motivational deficits, including loss of motivation, are often seen in mental disorders such as depression, addiction and ADHD. However, the brain mechanisms behind these problems remain largely unclear.

The research team, led by Hiroyuki Mizoguchi, associate professor, and Kiyofumi Yamada, professor emeritus, at Nagoya University's Graduate School of Medicine, focused on orexin neurons. These neurons regulate essential physiological functions such as sleep, appetite and energy expenditure. Although recent studies suggest that orexin neurons also influence motivation, their exact role has remained unclear.

[...] suppressing orexin neurons impaired motivation, but artificially exciting them beyond natural levels did not enhance it. The researchers say this asymmetry suggests orexin neurons are necessary for sustaining motivated behavior, though simply raising their activity may not be sufficient to increase it. Further studies are needed to determine what governs this effect, such as the duration or pattern of orexin neuron activity.

Mizoguchi concluded, "Our study demonstrated significant changes in orexin neuron activity depending on expected rewards and the effort required, suggesting a potential mechanism for translating expectations into sustained action."

Future research will investigate the input and output circuits connected to orexin neurons. A deeper understanding of orexin function may inform new approaches to addressing motivational deficits, including loss of motivation or challenges in sustaining goal-directed behavior. (MORE - missing details, no ads)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20982.html Thu, 30 Jul 2026 16:59:55 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20982.html https://www.popsci.com/science/human-new...evolution/

EXCERPTS: If there is one thing modern humans share with our long-gone ancestors, it’s that caring for newborn babies is a daunting and exhausting task. Our species comes into this world much less developed than other great apes, with weak neck muscles, soft skulls, and still underdeveloped brains that rapidly grow after birth.

As a result, human parents must spend significantly more time holding and caring for their young to keep them alive or prevent deformational plagiocephaly, or flat head syndrome. It appears that this weakness has been the case for over one million years, according to a study published today in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences.

One theory for this lag in development is called the obstetrical dilemma. The soft noggin and underdeveloped brain may be a trade-off for the large brains that develop later and our ability to walk upright (which affects the shape of the birth canal). Still, pinpointing when this helpless newborn phase arose within our evolutionary timeline is difficult. Fossils of our distant ancestors are mostly fragmented, and rarely include the remains of infants.

A new approach detailed in this study may be able to help. It can be applied to fossils of any age, and may provide some new pieces to the evolutionary puzzle.

“Our method looks for changes in the shape of the cranium (the top part of the skull) which occurred around or soon after birth and remained to some extent into adulthood,” Yousuke Kaifu, a study co-author and anthropologist from the University Museum at the University of Tokyo, said in a statement. “Nowadays, this is a common condition, called deformational plagiocephaly. The shape of the head is affected by the baby lying the same way frequently due to how they are held or laid down, and from the baby’s neck muscles being too weak to control the position of the head.”

[...] They found that the chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans, which are born more physically independent and capable, had a more narrow range of cranial deformity. All of the human samples (modern or fossil) had a much broader range of deformation and head shapes.

“This was exciting as we don’t know a lot about the behavior of Homo erectus. They lived between more than 1 million to 110,000 years ago, and we only have a tiny archaeological record from their stone tools,” Kaifu explained. “However, if they gave birth to physically helpless babies, then this tells us something about their behaviors, as they would need to have cared for the baby as diligently as we do.”

This level of infant care would have required a bit of social interaction, since it would have been difficult for new mothers to be the only one caring for and protecting a newborn from large predators and other dangers... (MORE - missing details)]]> https://www.popsci.com/science/human-new...evolution/

EXCERPTS: If there is one thing modern humans share with our long-gone ancestors, it’s that caring for newborn babies is a daunting and exhausting task. Our species comes into this world much less developed than other great apes, with weak neck muscles, soft skulls, and still underdeveloped brains that rapidly grow after birth.

As a result, human parents must spend significantly more time holding and caring for their young to keep them alive or prevent deformational plagiocephaly, or flat head syndrome. It appears that this weakness has been the case for over one million years, according to a study published today in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences.

One theory for this lag in development is called the obstetrical dilemma. The soft noggin and underdeveloped brain may be a trade-off for the large brains that develop later and our ability to walk upright (which affects the shape of the birth canal). Still, pinpointing when this helpless newborn phase arose within our evolutionary timeline is difficult. Fossils of our distant ancestors are mostly fragmented, and rarely include the remains of infants.

A new approach detailed in this study may be able to help. It can be applied to fossils of any age, and may provide some new pieces to the evolutionary puzzle.

“Our method looks for changes in the shape of the cranium (the top part of the skull) which occurred around or soon after birth and remained to some extent into adulthood,” Yousuke Kaifu, a study co-author and anthropologist from the University Museum at the University of Tokyo, said in a statement. “Nowadays, this is a common condition, called deformational plagiocephaly. The shape of the head is affected by the baby lying the same way frequently due to how they are held or laid down, and from the baby’s neck muscles being too weak to control the position of the head.”

[...] They found that the chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans, which are born more physically independent and capable, had a more narrow range of cranial deformity. All of the human samples (modern or fossil) had a much broader range of deformation and head shapes.

“This was exciting as we don’t know a lot about the behavior of Homo erectus. They lived between more than 1 million to 110,000 years ago, and we only have a tiny archaeological record from their stone tools,” Kaifu explained. “However, if they gave birth to physically helpless babies, then this tells us something about their behaviors, as they would need to have cared for the baby as diligently as we do.”

This level of infant care would have required a bit of social interaction, since it would have been difficult for new mothers to be the only one caring for and protecting a newborn from large predators and other dangers... (MORE - missing details)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20916.html Tue, 21 Jul 2026 16:34:12 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20916.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1136143

INTRO: Your brain has something surprising in common with the ocean: waves! Electrical activity washes over the brain’s surface, creating what are called traveling brain waves or neural traveling waves. These waves cause real differences in your behavior and attention, and—again, like ocean waves—can have variable causes, from intrinsic to environmental inputs.

A new review article written by Salk Institute neuroscientists synthesizes the physiological and computational information about these neural traveling waves and draws a new conclusion: Neural traveling waves are a computational engine in the visual cortex. These waves allow the visual cortex (and likely other areas of the brain) to build representations of the external world, enabling our capacity to predict, reconstruct, and perceive the world around us.

The piece was published in Neuron on July 21, 2026.

What are traveling brain waves, and why do they exist? Salk neuroscientist John Reynolds, PhD, was the first to identify traveling brain waves in the visual systems of awake animals back in 2020. What’s more, his lab found that these traveling brain waves directly correlated with whether those animals were able to perceive an object right in front of them—helping explain the classic conundrum of searching for something, like a pair of keys, that evidently was right in front of you the whole time.

After finding that traveling brain waves exist in awake animals, and that they alter animals’ ability to perceive stimuli at a given moment, Reynolds had a new question: Why?

“This paper lays out, for the first time in a single integrated framework, what the brain can actually compute by virtue of having this recurrent wave-generating circuitry,” says Reynolds, senior and co-corresponding author of the paper.

The researchers focused on the visual cortex, proposing neural traveling waves allow the visual cortex to: 1) modulate perception moment to moment, 2) turn recent sensory inputs into an internal representation of those inputs, 3) generate short-term predictions about the external world, and 4) store and replay patterns that represent memories of events unfolding in time.

What does this new framework mean? The paper suggests that neural brain waves are much more than just electrical noise. The neural connections that generate these waves aren’t simply relaying signals; rather, they change their physiology (“synaptic weights”) to reflect the outside world.

Each sight, smell, sound, and action of an animal alters the connections that generate these waves, building the neural circuitry that the brain uses to construct an internal representation of the external world.

“This is, in a meaningful sense, analogous to what large language models like ChatGPT do,” explains Reynolds. “They learn statistical structure from language and use that knowledge to generate meaningful and appropriately structured text that reflects the patterns of language. The brain may be doing something functionally similar—a biological generative model built from the ground up by experience.”

Each time the brain receives sensory input, it must decide, what am I most likely sensing right now? Though the world is rich and complex, it is also somewhat predictable; objects around you exist in 3D space, you see the world in retinal images that change with your eye and body movements, and the laws of physics and physiology overlay this all.

Reynolds’ paper proposes that the brain internalizes these regularities by encoding them in networks of synapses, which can then generate waves that allow the brain to infer the likely causes of sensory input and construct an internal model of the world. This framing brings us one step closer to understanding how our brains compute the busy, messy world around us, turning a complicated sensory onslaught into behaviors and experiences... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1136143

INTRO: Your brain has something surprising in common with the ocean: waves! Electrical activity washes over the brain’s surface, creating what are called traveling brain waves or neural traveling waves. These waves cause real differences in your behavior and attention, and—again, like ocean waves—can have variable causes, from intrinsic to environmental inputs.

A new review article written by Salk Institute neuroscientists synthesizes the physiological and computational information about these neural traveling waves and draws a new conclusion: Neural traveling waves are a computational engine in the visual cortex. These waves allow the visual cortex (and likely other areas of the brain) to build representations of the external world, enabling our capacity to predict, reconstruct, and perceive the world around us.

The piece was published in Neuron on July 21, 2026.

What are traveling brain waves, and why do they exist? Salk neuroscientist John Reynolds, PhD, was the first to identify traveling brain waves in the visual systems of awake animals back in 2020. What’s more, his lab found that these traveling brain waves directly correlated with whether those animals were able to perceive an object right in front of them—helping explain the classic conundrum of searching for something, like a pair of keys, that evidently was right in front of you the whole time.

After finding that traveling brain waves exist in awake animals, and that they alter animals’ ability to perceive stimuli at a given moment, Reynolds had a new question: Why?

“This paper lays out, for the first time in a single integrated framework, what the brain can actually compute by virtue of having this recurrent wave-generating circuitry,” says Reynolds, senior and co-corresponding author of the paper.

The researchers focused on the visual cortex, proposing neural traveling waves allow the visual cortex to: 1) modulate perception moment to moment, 2) turn recent sensory inputs into an internal representation of those inputs, 3) generate short-term predictions about the external world, and 4) store and replay patterns that represent memories of events unfolding in time.

What does this new framework mean? The paper suggests that neural brain waves are much more than just electrical noise. The neural connections that generate these waves aren’t simply relaying signals; rather, they change their physiology (“synaptic weights”) to reflect the outside world.

Each sight, smell, sound, and action of an animal alters the connections that generate these waves, building the neural circuitry that the brain uses to construct an internal representation of the external world.

“This is, in a meaningful sense, analogous to what large language models like ChatGPT do,” explains Reynolds. “They learn statistical structure from language and use that knowledge to generate meaningful and appropriately structured text that reflects the patterns of language. The brain may be doing something functionally similar—a biological generative model built from the ground up by experience.”

Each time the brain receives sensory input, it must decide, what am I most likely sensing right now? Though the world is rich and complex, it is also somewhat predictable; objects around you exist in 3D space, you see the world in retinal images that change with your eye and body movements, and the laws of physics and physiology overlay this all.

Reynolds’ paper proposes that the brain internalizes these regularities by encoding them in networks of synapses, which can then generate waves that allow the brain to infer the likely causes of sensory input and construct an internal model of the world. This framing brings us one step closer to understanding how our brains compute the busy, messy world around us, turning a complicated sensory onslaught into behaviors and experiences... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20873.html Fri, 17 Jul 2026 17:54:07 +0000 Magical Realist]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20873.html

"Carved from mammoth ivory around 40,000 years ago, the Vogelherd Horse belongs among humanity’s earliest known figurative artworks. Archaeologists found it inside Germany’s Vogelherd Cave, a site linked to Aurignacian communities.

Measuring 4.8 centimetres long and 2.5 centimetres high, the tiny sculpture captures a horse with a curved neck and powerful posture. Its missing legs have not erased the artist’s careful work or clear sense of movement.

Who carved it, and what did the horse mean to people living through the Ice Age? ??"]]>

"Carved from mammoth ivory around 40,000 years ago, the Vogelherd Horse belongs among humanity’s earliest known figurative artworks. Archaeologists found it inside Germany’s Vogelherd Cave, a site linked to Aurignacian communities.

Measuring 4.8 centimetres long and 2.5 centimetres high, the tiny sculpture captures a horse with a curved neck and powerful posture. Its missing legs have not erased the artist’s careful work or clear sense of movement.

Who carved it, and what did the horse mean to people living through the Ice Age? ??"]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20858.html Tue, 14 Jul 2026 20:22:10 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20858.html https://www.the-scientist.com/how-pregna...rain-74735

EXCERPTS: Few transformations in the human body are as intense as pregnancy. [...] While scientists have characterized many of these physiological adaptations, for years, they overlooked how pregnancy, as well as motherhood, could reshape a key organ of the human body: the brain.

[...] In Dulac’s lab, Kohl mapped how these MPOA galanin-expressing neurons communicated with the other brain regions to control different aspects of parenting. This anatomical work revealed a “shockingly complex picture,” he said, showing that these neurons received inputs from and projected to more than 20 brain regions. The researchers also found that discrete pools of the galanin-expressing neurons controlled specific aspects of parental behavior, such as the motivation to interact and groom pups, painting a more detailed picture of how these neurons orchestrate this complex behavior.

[...] To map how the maternal brain adapts to pregnancy as it unfolds, Jacobs’ team followed a woman from preconception to up to two years postpartum. Pregnancy was associated with marked reductions in gray matter volume and cortical thickness, revealing extensive remodeling of the brain during pregnancy itself. This aligned with previous neuroimaging work showing gray matter volume reductions before and after pregnancy. “It was really neat to see the week-by-week change in gray matter volume,” Jacobs explained. “We really didn't have any idea about what the sort of temporal pace of that change would be. It was really neat to be able to trace those trajectories and realize it's pretty linear.”

Jacob is now focusing on pregnancy’s molecular signatures, using high-throughput proteomics to assess thousands of blood proteins associated with different body systems and determine which ones track with the brain changes they previously described. Additionally, her team is launching a much broader maternal brain project that will include a more diverse sample of women to understand which pregnancy signatures may be universal or unique to each woman.

[...] The team also showed that these morphological changes lasted up to two years after childbirth—a finding Carmona and Hoekzema revisited and reported that could actually last for up to six years. Carmona noted that while these changes do not persist in all women, for most they do. “We don't know if it's pregnancy or child-rearing, but changes seem to remain several years or decades postpartum, opening the door to the fact that they might be [for a] lifetime,” she added.

[...] While accumulating evidence from basic and human research has expanded what researchers know about the effects of pregnancy and motherhood on the brain, many questions remain to be answered. ... “Women are tired of confronting a medical system that was never designed to serve them. They want basic answers about their bodies,” Jacobs explained. “Matrescence is such a beautiful time, and for scientists to be able to approach it with awe and curiosity is just such a special thing.” (MORE - missing details)]]> https://www.the-scientist.com/how-pregna...rain-74735

EXCERPTS: Few transformations in the human body are as intense as pregnancy. [...] While scientists have characterized many of these physiological adaptations, for years, they overlooked how pregnancy, as well as motherhood, could reshape a key organ of the human body: the brain.

[...] In Dulac’s lab, Kohl mapped how these MPOA galanin-expressing neurons communicated with the other brain regions to control different aspects of parenting. This anatomical work revealed a “shockingly complex picture,” he said, showing that these neurons received inputs from and projected to more than 20 brain regions. The researchers also found that discrete pools of the galanin-expressing neurons controlled specific aspects of parental behavior, such as the motivation to interact and groom pups, painting a more detailed picture of how these neurons orchestrate this complex behavior.

[...] To map how the maternal brain adapts to pregnancy as it unfolds, Jacobs’ team followed a woman from preconception to up to two years postpartum. Pregnancy was associated with marked reductions in gray matter volume and cortical thickness, revealing extensive remodeling of the brain during pregnancy itself. This aligned with previous neuroimaging work showing gray matter volume reductions before and after pregnancy. “It was really neat to see the week-by-week change in gray matter volume,” Jacobs explained. “We really didn't have any idea about what the sort of temporal pace of that change would be. It was really neat to be able to trace those trajectories and realize it's pretty linear.”

Jacob is now focusing on pregnancy’s molecular signatures, using high-throughput proteomics to assess thousands of blood proteins associated with different body systems and determine which ones track with the brain changes they previously described. Additionally, her team is launching a much broader maternal brain project that will include a more diverse sample of women to understand which pregnancy signatures may be universal or unique to each woman.

[...] The team also showed that these morphological changes lasted up to two years after childbirth—a finding Carmona and Hoekzema revisited and reported that could actually last for up to six years. Carmona noted that while these changes do not persist in all women, for most they do. “We don't know if it's pregnancy or child-rearing, but changes seem to remain several years or decades postpartum, opening the door to the fact that they might be [for a] lifetime,” she added.

[...] While accumulating evidence from basic and human research has expanded what researchers know about the effects of pregnancy and motherhood on the brain, many questions remain to be answered. ... “Women are tired of confronting a medical system that was never designed to serve them. They want basic answers about their bodies,” Jacobs explained. “Matrescence is such a beautiful time, and for scientists to be able to approach it with awe and curiosity is just such a special thing.” (MORE - missing details)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20836.html Fri, 10 Jul 2026 18:01:04 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20836.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1135679

INTRO: Research simulates real-life multitasking performance to assess potential differences between men and women. When coordinating five different tasks, men ignored the conversational task more than twice as often as women, while showing similar performance to women in all other tasks.

Multitasking, defined as the ability to perform multiple tasks simultaneously or switch between them, has become a central feature of modern life, occurring in contexts such as driving, work, household activities and even leisure. Despite the widespread stereotype that women are better at multitasking, research has shown only small and inconsistent sex differences, calling into question the existence of meaningful differences in this domain.

In light of this, with the support of the Bial Foundation, André and Diana Szameitat (from Brunel University of London and City St George’s, University of London, UK, respectively) conducted a study to clarify whether sex differences in multitasking exist and to explore possible explanations for the origin of this stereotype.

In the article “Men Talk Less Than Women During Multitasking”, published in the scientific journal Psychological Research, the researchers explain that they developed a complex multitasking paradigm consisting of five tasks designed to simulate real-life scenarios, which more closely reproduces everyday demands than most previous studies... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1135679

INTRO: Research simulates real-life multitasking performance to assess potential differences between men and women. When coordinating five different tasks, men ignored the conversational task more than twice as often as women, while showing similar performance to women in all other tasks.

Multitasking, defined as the ability to perform multiple tasks simultaneously or switch between them, has become a central feature of modern life, occurring in contexts such as driving, work, household activities and even leisure. Despite the widespread stereotype that women are better at multitasking, research has shown only small and inconsistent sex differences, calling into question the existence of meaningful differences in this domain.

In light of this, with the support of the Bial Foundation, André and Diana Szameitat (from Brunel University of London and City St George’s, University of London, UK, respectively) conducted a study to clarify whether sex differences in multitasking exist and to explore possible explanations for the origin of this stereotype.

In the article “Men Talk Less Than Women During Multitasking”, published in the scientific journal Psychological Research, the researchers explain that they developed a complex multitasking paradigm consisting of five tasks designed to simulate real-life scenarios, which more closely reproduces everyday demands than most previous studies... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20824.html Thu, 09 Jul 2026 04:20:27 +0000 Magical Realist]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20824.html
"Philemon and other figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life.

Philemon represented a force which was not myself.

In my fantasies I held conversations with him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought.

For I observed clearly that it was he who spoke, not I.

He said I treated thoughts as if I generated them myself, but in his view thoughts were like animals in the forest, or people in a room, or birds in the air, and added,

“If you should see people in a room, you would not think that you had made those people, or that you were responsible for them.”

It was he who taught me psychic objectivity, the reality of the psyche.

Through him the distinction was clarified between myself and the object of my thought.

He confronted me in an objective manner, and I understood that there is something in me which can say things that I do not know and do not intend, things which may even be directed against me. ~Carl Jung, Memories Dreams and Reflections, Page 183."

"Only then I learned psychological objectivity.

Only then could I say to a patient, ‘Be quiet, something is happening.?

There are such things as mice in a house.

You cannot say you are wrong when you have a thought.

For the understanding of the unconscious we must see our thoughts as events, as phenomena. ~Carl Jung, Liber Novus, Page 249, Footnote 188."

"All things are full of Gods."--Thales of Miletus]]>
"Philemon and other figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life.

Philemon represented a force which was not myself.

In my fantasies I held conversations with him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought.

For I observed clearly that it was he who spoke, not I.

He said I treated thoughts as if I generated them myself, but in his view thoughts were like animals in the forest, or people in a room, or birds in the air, and added,

“If you should see people in a room, you would not think that you had made those people, or that you were responsible for them.”

It was he who taught me psychic objectivity, the reality of the psyche.

Through him the distinction was clarified between myself and the object of my thought.

He confronted me in an objective manner, and I understood that there is something in me which can say things that I do not know and do not intend, things which may even be directed against me. ~Carl Jung, Memories Dreams and Reflections, Page 183."

"Only then I learned psychological objectivity.

Only then could I say to a patient, ‘Be quiet, something is happening.?

There are such things as mice in a house.

You cannot say you are wrong when you have a thought.

For the understanding of the unconscious we must see our thoughts as events, as phenomena. ~Carl Jung, Liber Novus, Page 249, Footnote 188."

"All things are full of Gods."--Thales of Miletus]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20810.html Tue, 07 Jul 2026 16:32:54 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20810.html https://gizmodo.com/people-who-cant-visu...2000781894

EXCERPT: The philosopher David Hume believed that, to understand abstract concepts, humans needed to summon a mental image to picture the idea. But since Hume’s time in the 18th century, we now have a more nuanced understanding of the human brain’s complexity-and our philosophy might be due for some upgrades, according to a new study.

Scientists estimate that roughly 4% to 5% of the population experience aphantasia, or the inability to form mental images. People can be either born with aphantasia or develop it later, but it’s typically not considered a disability or medical condition. But aphantasia isn’t known to prevent people from having a firm grasp of abstract ideas-things like “triangle,” “friend,” or “memory,” explained Uku Tooming and Roomet Jakapi, philosophers at the University of Tartu in Estonia, in a statement. So, what’s going on here?

In a recent paper published in Neuropsychologia, Tooming and Jakapi present a challenge to Hume; that is, abstract thought might not be as grounded in images as we might believe.

[...] as Tooming and Jakapi counter in the paper, experimental evidence suggests that some aphantasics lack imagery across other types of sensory experiences and yet are still capable of abstraction. Then there’s the easy way out: Okay, maybe aphantasics are an exception to the rule. But the authors took issue with that response, as the challenge is “not merely one of accommodating an exception but of explaining how abstraction is even possible without reliance on the imagistic processes that Hume sees as essential.” (MORE - missing details)]]> https://gizmodo.com/people-who-cant-visu...2000781894

EXCERPT: The philosopher David Hume believed that, to understand abstract concepts, humans needed to summon a mental image to picture the idea. But since Hume’s time in the 18th century, we now have a more nuanced understanding of the human brain’s complexity-and our philosophy might be due for some upgrades, according to a new study.

Scientists estimate that roughly 4% to 5% of the population experience aphantasia, or the inability to form mental images. People can be either born with aphantasia or develop it later, but it’s typically not considered a disability or medical condition. But aphantasia isn’t known to prevent people from having a firm grasp of abstract ideas-things like “triangle,” “friend,” or “memory,” explained Uku Tooming and Roomet Jakapi, philosophers at the University of Tartu in Estonia, in a statement. So, what’s going on here?

In a recent paper published in Neuropsychologia, Tooming and Jakapi present a challenge to Hume; that is, abstract thought might not be as grounded in images as we might believe.

[...] as Tooming and Jakapi counter in the paper, experimental evidence suggests that some aphantasics lack imagery across other types of sensory experiences and yet are still capable of abstraction. Then there’s the easy way out: Okay, maybe aphantasics are an exception to the rule. But the authors took issue with that response, as the challenge is “not merely one of accommodating an exception but of explaining how abstraction is even possible without reliance on the imagistic processes that Hume sees as essential.” (MORE - missing details)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20786.html Sat, 04 Jul 2026 01:24:01 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20786.html Simping: Fear of being single drives men to engage in obsessive romantic pursuit
https://www.psypost.org/fear-of-being-si...c-pursuit/

EXCERPTS: Men who engage in excessive and obsessive romantic gestures toward unreciprocated interests are largely driven by an underlying fear of remaining single. A recent psychological investigation identified the key behaviors associated with the modern colloquial term “simping” and found that this dating strategy is highly sensitive to a person’s anxiety over their relationship status. These findings were published in the Journal of Personality.

In recent years, internet culture popularized the concept of “simps” to describe men who display extravagant or costly dedication to a romantic prospect. These men will often shower a target with unreciprocated affection, expensive gifts, or endless attention. They differ from universally supportive partners because their actions go far beyond ordinary warmth, often resembling obsessive relational intrusion.

[...] Throughout human history, men have typically acted as the initiators in courtship. Women face higher biological costs associated with childbearing and raising offspring. As a result of these ancestral conditions, women historically preferred partners who could provide reliable resources and commit to their long-term survival.

According to a concept called evolutionary mismatch, modern technology introduces a vastly expanded dating market that our brains are not adapted to navigate. Instead of competing with a few local peers, people now face an almost limitless pool of potential rivals online.

This mismatch places intense competitive pressure on men. Skills focused on flirting and persuasive courtship are newly required to stand out in a globalized arena. At the same time, shifting economic independence among women has raised the baseline standards for male partners.The researchers suspected that some men use excessive displays of commitment as a compensatory strategy.

[...] Society often stigmatizes single people, and men face intense pressure from peers and family to secure a partner. ... Self-reported physical attractiveness, social status, and overall mate value did not actually predict a man’s likelihood of engaging in these behaviors. Instead, a fear of being single emerged as the strongest psychological predictor.

Men who reported higher levels of anxiety about never finding a partner were much more likely to report a history of engaging in these obsessive and excessive romantic overtures. They also exhibited lower emotional stability in general personality assessments.

[...] The researchers asked half of the men to read and reflect on a hypothetical scenario designed to evoke feelings of loneliness. The story described attending a close friend’s wedding alone, surrounded by happy couples, and facing the daunting prospect of going home to an empty apartment.

The other half read a neutral control scenario about attending a wedding but enjoying the social connections and looking forward to an active weekend with friends. The manipulation actively influenced the participants’ mindsets. Men exposed to the negative singlehood scenario reported a temporary spike in their fear of remaining single compared to the control group.

When subsequently asked about their dating strategies, men in the negative scenario group who already had a current romantic interest expressed a higher tendency to engage in excessive pursuit behaviors toward that person.

[...] Future research should investigate whether women display similar patterns of behavior under pressure, or if their compensatory strategies look different. Women might engage in actions focused more on appearance enhancement or emotional labor rather than excessive financial investment.

Additionally, the experimental prompt used to induce singlehood fears might have simply generated a broadly negative mood. Future studies could include emotional assessments to isolate the exact feelings driving the behavior, rather than general sadness... (MORE - missing details)

---

Modern life may be outpacing the human mind
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1134610

INTRO: The human brain evolved for a world of familiar faces, immediate threats and small social groups. But the world around us is changing far faster than human biology can keep pace. That mismatch may help explain some of the stress, loneliness and constant comparison people experience today.

The review, co-authored by Dr Jose Yong, Senior Lecturer at James Cook University, Singapore, and Dr Sarah Chan, Research Fellow at the Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities at SUTD, is published in Behavioral Sciences. Titled Evolutionary mismatch, stress, and competition: Making sense of psychosocial problems in the polycrisis era, it examines how stress, competition and loneliness can be understood through an evolutionary lens.

Evolutionary mismatch describes what happens when human instincts shaped in one kind of environment are forced to operate in a very different one. Humans evolved in smaller, close-knit groups, where danger, belonging, status and trust were read through familiar people and everyday face-to-face signals. Now, those same instincts are being triggered in dense cities, digital platforms, unequal societies and a world shaped by overlapping pressures. The result is an internal confusion: responses that once made sense in a small familiar group can feel out of place, or simply overwhelming, in modern life.

Social media makes this mismatch especially visible. The urge to understand our place within a group may once have helped people maintain trust and cooperation among familiar faces. Today, that same instinct can be triggered by an endless stream of curated lives, achievements and status signals.

At the centre of the paper is competition. Modern environments can intensify the feeling that others are judging, outperforming or leaving us behind. The authors propose that this heightened sense of competition may be one pathway through which evolutionary mismatch contributes to stress and poorer wellbeing.

“Competition is not new, but modern life can make it feel constant,” said Dr Yong. “An evolutionary perspective may help explain why people respond so strongly to comparison and the fear of falling behind, even when those signals come from strangers or screens rather than a small social group.”

The paper draws on existing research and theory rather than new data. It presents evolutionary mismatch as one way of understanding modern social and psychological problems, alongside psychological, social and economic explanations. These ideas will need to be tested through real-world research.

That matters because the response to modern stress cannot rest only on telling individuals to be more resilient. If environments are activating old instincts in new and unhelpful ways, then cities, workplaces, digital platforms and communities also need to be part of the solution... (MORE - no ads)]]> Simping: Fear of being single drives men to engage in obsessive romantic pursuit
https://www.psypost.org/fear-of-being-si...c-pursuit/

EXCERPTS: Men who engage in excessive and obsessive romantic gestures toward unreciprocated interests are largely driven by an underlying fear of remaining single. A recent psychological investigation identified the key behaviors associated with the modern colloquial term “simping” and found that this dating strategy is highly sensitive to a person’s anxiety over their relationship status. These findings were published in the Journal of Personality.

In recent years, internet culture popularized the concept of “simps” to describe men who display extravagant or costly dedication to a romantic prospect. These men will often shower a target with unreciprocated affection, expensive gifts, or endless attention. They differ from universally supportive partners because their actions go far beyond ordinary warmth, often resembling obsessive relational intrusion.

[...] Throughout human history, men have typically acted as the initiators in courtship. Women face higher biological costs associated with childbearing and raising offspring. As a result of these ancestral conditions, women historically preferred partners who could provide reliable resources and commit to their long-term survival.

According to a concept called evolutionary mismatch, modern technology introduces a vastly expanded dating market that our brains are not adapted to navigate. Instead of competing with a few local peers, people now face an almost limitless pool of potential rivals online.

This mismatch places intense competitive pressure on men. Skills focused on flirting and persuasive courtship are newly required to stand out in a globalized arena. At the same time, shifting economic independence among women has raised the baseline standards for male partners.The researchers suspected that some men use excessive displays of commitment as a compensatory strategy.

[...] Society often stigmatizes single people, and men face intense pressure from peers and family to secure a partner. ... Self-reported physical attractiveness, social status, and overall mate value did not actually predict a man’s likelihood of engaging in these behaviors. Instead, a fear of being single emerged as the strongest psychological predictor.

Men who reported higher levels of anxiety about never finding a partner were much more likely to report a history of engaging in these obsessive and excessive romantic overtures. They also exhibited lower emotional stability in general personality assessments.

[...] The researchers asked half of the men to read and reflect on a hypothetical scenario designed to evoke feelings of loneliness. The story described attending a close friend’s wedding alone, surrounded by happy couples, and facing the daunting prospect of going home to an empty apartment.

The other half read a neutral control scenario about attending a wedding but enjoying the social connections and looking forward to an active weekend with friends. The manipulation actively influenced the participants’ mindsets. Men exposed to the negative singlehood scenario reported a temporary spike in their fear of remaining single compared to the control group.

When subsequently asked about their dating strategies, men in the negative scenario group who already had a current romantic interest expressed a higher tendency to engage in excessive pursuit behaviors toward that person.

[...] Future research should investigate whether women display similar patterns of behavior under pressure, or if their compensatory strategies look different. Women might engage in actions focused more on appearance enhancement or emotional labor rather than excessive financial investment.

Additionally, the experimental prompt used to induce singlehood fears might have simply generated a broadly negative mood. Future studies could include emotional assessments to isolate the exact feelings driving the behavior, rather than general sadness... (MORE - missing details)

---

Modern life may be outpacing the human mind
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1134610

INTRO: The human brain evolved for a world of familiar faces, immediate threats and small social groups. But the world around us is changing far faster than human biology can keep pace. That mismatch may help explain some of the stress, loneliness and constant comparison people experience today.

The review, co-authored by Dr Jose Yong, Senior Lecturer at James Cook University, Singapore, and Dr Sarah Chan, Research Fellow at the Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities at SUTD, is published in Behavioral Sciences. Titled Evolutionary mismatch, stress, and competition: Making sense of psychosocial problems in the polycrisis era, it examines how stress, competition and loneliness can be understood through an evolutionary lens.

Evolutionary mismatch describes what happens when human instincts shaped in one kind of environment are forced to operate in a very different one. Humans evolved in smaller, close-knit groups, where danger, belonging, status and trust were read through familiar people and everyday face-to-face signals. Now, those same instincts are being triggered in dense cities, digital platforms, unequal societies and a world shaped by overlapping pressures. The result is an internal confusion: responses that once made sense in a small familiar group can feel out of place, or simply overwhelming, in modern life.

Social media makes this mismatch especially visible. The urge to understand our place within a group may once have helped people maintain trust and cooperation among familiar faces. Today, that same instinct can be triggered by an endless stream of curated lives, achievements and status signals.

At the centre of the paper is competition. Modern environments can intensify the feeling that others are judging, outperforming or leaving us behind. The authors propose that this heightened sense of competition may be one pathway through which evolutionary mismatch contributes to stress and poorer wellbeing.

“Competition is not new, but modern life can make it feel constant,” said Dr Yong. “An evolutionary perspective may help explain why people respond so strongly to comparison and the fear of falling behind, even when those signals come from strangers or screens rather than a small social group.”

The paper draws on existing research and theory rather than new data. It presents evolutionary mismatch as one way of understanding modern social and psychological problems, alongside psychological, social and economic explanations. These ideas will need to be tested through real-world research.

That matters because the response to modern stress cannot rest only on telling individuals to be more resilient. If environments are activating old instincts in new and unhelpful ways, then cities, workplaces, digital platforms and communities also need to be part of the solution... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20761.html Tue, 30 Jun 2026 16:53:05 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20761.html https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2026/jun/chil...ult-humans

PRESS RELEASE: The tight fit of a baby’s head through a mother’s birth canal, which causes great difficulty in childbirth, is not unique to humans, as previously understood. Instead, some small-bodied primate babies have heads almost twice as large as their mothers’ pelvic space, a new study led by UCL researchers has found.

The findings, published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, challenge the theory of an exclusively human ‘obstetrical dilemma’ - the idea that our large heads and narrow pelvises (adapted for upright walking), have made childbirth uniquely difficult for our species.

Researchers at UCL have revisited the evidence and found that although constricted birth is not experienced by other apes, it is common among many small-bodied primates, particularly American monkeys like bushbabies and squirrel monkeys. For example, the heads of newborn squirrel monkeys can be almost twice the size of the mother’s pelvic space.

Co-corresponding author Dr Nicole Torres Tamayo (UCL Anthropology) said: “Much of the data that informed earlier studies was flawed. It had been collected in a human-centric way that failed to consider the anatomy of other species.

“As well as greatly expanding the number of species considered, we collected measurements that took into account the specific anatomy of different species. This data then informed our 3D modelling. In the past, the measurement for the newborns’ heads were from the forehead to the back of the skull. This assumed that all babies are born crown-first, as most humans are. But species like the gelada monkey, with their pronounced snouts, are often birthed face-first. We took this positioning into account.”

Using advanced 3D modelling techniques and by greatly expanding the number of species studied (from eight to 29), the research team found that tight fits at birth were especially common among proportionally smaller species.

Co-corresponding author Dr Lia Betti (UCL Anthropology) said: “Interestingly, we found that some of the small-bodied primates that experience a constrained fit during childbirth have developed clever adaptations to make the process less difficult. The pelvic bones of female rhesus macaques fuse together later than in males, during their reproductive years, and in bushbabies they never fuse, allowing the pelvis to expand during birth to accommodate the neonatal head.

“The findings of our study reshape previously held assumptions about how unique human childbirth is, revealing a diversity of obstetrical dilemmas and adaptations across primates.”]]> https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2026/jun/chil...ult-humans

PRESS RELEASE: The tight fit of a baby’s head through a mother’s birth canal, which causes great difficulty in childbirth, is not unique to humans, as previously understood. Instead, some small-bodied primate babies have heads almost twice as large as their mothers’ pelvic space, a new study led by UCL researchers has found.

The findings, published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, challenge the theory of an exclusively human ‘obstetrical dilemma’ - the idea that our large heads and narrow pelvises (adapted for upright walking), have made childbirth uniquely difficult for our species.

Researchers at UCL have revisited the evidence and found that although constricted birth is not experienced by other apes, it is common among many small-bodied primates, particularly American monkeys like bushbabies and squirrel monkeys. For example, the heads of newborn squirrel monkeys can be almost twice the size of the mother’s pelvic space.

Co-corresponding author Dr Nicole Torres Tamayo (UCL Anthropology) said: “Much of the data that informed earlier studies was flawed. It had been collected in a human-centric way that failed to consider the anatomy of other species.

“As well as greatly expanding the number of species considered, we collected measurements that took into account the specific anatomy of different species. This data then informed our 3D modelling. In the past, the measurement for the newborns’ heads were from the forehead to the back of the skull. This assumed that all babies are born crown-first, as most humans are. But species like the gelada monkey, with their pronounced snouts, are often birthed face-first. We took this positioning into account.”

Using advanced 3D modelling techniques and by greatly expanding the number of species studied (from eight to 29), the research team found that tight fits at birth were especially common among proportionally smaller species.

Co-corresponding author Dr Lia Betti (UCL Anthropology) said: “Interestingly, we found that some of the small-bodied primates that experience a constrained fit during childbirth have developed clever adaptations to make the process less difficult. The pelvic bones of female rhesus macaques fuse together later than in males, during their reproductive years, and in bushbabies they never fuse, allowing the pelvis to expand during birth to accommodate the neonatal head.

“The findings of our study reshape previously held assumptions about how unique human childbirth is, revealing a diversity of obstetrical dilemmas and adaptations across primates.”]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20730.html Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:53:39 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20730.html https://www.uu.nl/en/news/do-animal-beha...ooperation

PRESS RELEASE: Behavioural scientists often study cooperation using a simple experiment. Two animals must pull ropes simultaneously to obtain a reward. Usually, only one such apparatus is placed in front of the enclosure.

This resembles situations in nature in which a group of animals cooperates to capture a single prey item. But for many primates, such situations are relatively rare. Much more often, monkeys spend their time foraging for food in trees and shrubs, where several food sources are available at the same time.

Changing social dynamics. “When monkeys gather to obtain food, they usually have more than one opportunity in nature,” says primatologist Liesbeth Sterck, who led the study. “A fruit tree does not contain just one place where fruit is available, but many. That allows animals to avoid one another, observe one another, or actively seek each other out. But when there’s only a single opportunity to obtain food, the social dynamics are very different.”

According to Sterck, this means researchers should be cautious when drawing conclusions from experiments that offer only one place to cooperate. Such experiments mainly show how animals behave when there is only a single opportunity available. Once several opportunities are introduced, partner preferences can change.

From one dominant duo to an entire group. Sterck’s team discovered this while studying a group of long-tailed macaques. Instead of offering the monkeys just one cooperation device, they sometimes provided three or even five. When only one device was available, it was almost entirely occupied by two adolescent males. They accounted for the vast majority of cooperative interactions in the group to obtain a food reward.

But when three or five devices became available, the social dynamics changed dramatically. Cooperation became much more evenly distributed throughout the group. The two males remained active, but they no longer dominated the task. They also began cooperating with other group members.

“When there is only one place to cooperate, you create a very specific situation,” says Sterck. “That does not mean previous studies using this setup were wrong. But it does mean that our interpretation of the animals’ behaviour may depend strongly on how many opportunities they are given.”

The peppernut principle. Sterck uses a typically Dutch example to explain the effect: the Sinterklaas celebration, during which small spiced biscuits known as “pepernoten” are thrown into crowds of children. “During Sinterklaas celebrations, these treats are scattered over a large area, and not offered to the children in one single spot,” she says. “That reduces competition and prevents arguments among children. We see something similar in our study. When there are several places where rewards can be obtained, the behaviour of the group changes.”

Hunting in the wild. Biologist Jeroen Zewald, who conducted the study as a biology student at Utrecht University, compares the findings to hunting in the wild. “Imagine hunting deer together when there is only a single animal available,” he says. “You want a partner who is good at hunting but who will not keep the entire reward afterwards. If there are prey animals everywhere, it matters much less whom you choose to cooperate with. The monkeys showed exactly this difference.”

The findings underline how strongly social behaviour depends on the surrounding environment. Animals themselves do not solely determine whom they cooperate with; the opportunities available to them matter as well.

Implications beyond animal cooperation. The researchers believe the findings may have consequences far beyond studies of cooperation. Many other behavioural experiments, including studies of social learning and animal culture, also rely on a single location or a single apparatus. This may limit the opportunities animals have to observe one another, learn from one another, or participate in the task.

If we want to understand how animals cooperate in the wild, we may also need to pay more attention to how many opportunities they have to do so, the researchers conclude. The study was published today in the journal Animal Behaviour.]]> https://www.uu.nl/en/news/do-animal-beha...ooperation

PRESS RELEASE: Behavioural scientists often study cooperation using a simple experiment. Two animals must pull ropes simultaneously to obtain a reward. Usually, only one such apparatus is placed in front of the enclosure.

This resembles situations in nature in which a group of animals cooperates to capture a single prey item. But for many primates, such situations are relatively rare. Much more often, monkeys spend their time foraging for food in trees and shrubs, where several food sources are available at the same time.

Changing social dynamics. “When monkeys gather to obtain food, they usually have more than one opportunity in nature,” says primatologist Liesbeth Sterck, who led the study. “A fruit tree does not contain just one place where fruit is available, but many. That allows animals to avoid one another, observe one another, or actively seek each other out. But when there’s only a single opportunity to obtain food, the social dynamics are very different.”

According to Sterck, this means researchers should be cautious when drawing conclusions from experiments that offer only one place to cooperate. Such experiments mainly show how animals behave when there is only a single opportunity available. Once several opportunities are introduced, partner preferences can change.

From one dominant duo to an entire group. Sterck’s team discovered this while studying a group of long-tailed macaques. Instead of offering the monkeys just one cooperation device, they sometimes provided three or even five. When only one device was available, it was almost entirely occupied by two adolescent males. They accounted for the vast majority of cooperative interactions in the group to obtain a food reward.

But when three or five devices became available, the social dynamics changed dramatically. Cooperation became much more evenly distributed throughout the group. The two males remained active, but they no longer dominated the task. They also began cooperating with other group members.

“When there is only one place to cooperate, you create a very specific situation,” says Sterck. “That does not mean previous studies using this setup were wrong. But it does mean that our interpretation of the animals’ behaviour may depend strongly on how many opportunities they are given.”

The peppernut principle. Sterck uses a typically Dutch example to explain the effect: the Sinterklaas celebration, during which small spiced biscuits known as “pepernoten” are thrown into crowds of children. “During Sinterklaas celebrations, these treats are scattered over a large area, and not offered to the children in one single spot,” she says. “That reduces competition and prevents arguments among children. We see something similar in our study. When there are several places where rewards can be obtained, the behaviour of the group changes.”

Hunting in the wild. Biologist Jeroen Zewald, who conducted the study as a biology student at Utrecht University, compares the findings to hunting in the wild. “Imagine hunting deer together when there is only a single animal available,” he says. “You want a partner who is good at hunting but who will not keep the entire reward afterwards. If there are prey animals everywhere, it matters much less whom you choose to cooperate with. The monkeys showed exactly this difference.”

The findings underline how strongly social behaviour depends on the surrounding environment. Animals themselves do not solely determine whom they cooperate with; the opportunities available to them matter as well.

Implications beyond animal cooperation. The researchers believe the findings may have consequences far beyond studies of cooperation. Many other behavioural experiments, including studies of social learning and animal culture, also rely on a single location or a single apparatus. This may limit the opportunities animals have to observe one another, learn from one another, or participate in the task.

If we want to understand how animals cooperate in the wild, we may also need to pay more attention to how many opportunities they have to do so, the researchers conclude. The study was published today in the journal Animal Behaviour.]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20714.html Wed, 24 Jun 2026 20:48:47 +0000 Magical Realist]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20714.html
"The unconscious is not a demonic monster but a natural entity—morally, aesthetically, and intellectually indifferent—that becomes truly dangerous only when our conscious attitude towards it is hopelessly misguided; the danger posed by the unconscious increases in proportion to the extent of repression. However, the moment the patient begins to assimilate the contents that were previously unconscious, that danger diminishes. Personality dissociation—the anxious separation of the day-side and the night-side—ceases as assimilation progresses. What my critic fears—namely, the unconscious overwhelming consciousness—is precisely what is most likely to occur when the unconscious is prevented from participating in life through repression, misinterpretation, and devaluation."
~Carl Gustav Jung, The Practical Use of Dream Analysis, 1931; from the book *Dream and Dream Interpretation*

"He who fights with monsters should see to it that he does not become a monster..." — Friedrich Nietzsche]]>
"The unconscious is not a demonic monster but a natural entity—morally, aesthetically, and intellectually indifferent—that becomes truly dangerous only when our conscious attitude towards it is hopelessly misguided; the danger posed by the unconscious increases in proportion to the extent of repression. However, the moment the patient begins to assimilate the contents that were previously unconscious, that danger diminishes. Personality dissociation—the anxious separation of the day-side and the night-side—ceases as assimilation progresses. What my critic fears—namely, the unconscious overwhelming consciousness—is precisely what is most likely to occur when the unconscious is prevented from participating in life through repression, misinterpretation, and devaluation."
~Carl Gustav Jung, The Practical Use of Dream Analysis, 1931; from the book *Dream and Dream Interpretation*

"He who fights with monsters should see to it that he does not become a monster..." — Friedrich Nietzsche]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20689.html Mon, 22 Jun 2026 16:01:31 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20689.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1132572

INTRO: Which major life events matter to young people? A recent study by the University of Zurich (UZH) shows that adolescents and young adults primarily cite positive, everyday developmental steps as formative events, for example school and apprenticeships, friendships, first relationships, travel and moving out of their parents’ home. UZH researchers evaluated open-ended written responses from 1,442 participants in a long-term study. Each participant was surveyed at the ages of 15, 17, 20 and 24.

The results paint a different picture than many classic studies on life events, which tend to focus on stressful experiences. Overall, 83% of the events mentioned were positive. The participants talked about school, training and apprenticeships particularly often, with these topics accounting for almost half of all mentions. Friendships and romantic relationships came in second place, at around 12%. Personal development and mental well-being accounted for about 8%, while travel and stays abroad stood at approximately 7%.

“Our results show that youth is not primarily composed of crises. Many young people primarily mention positive developmental steps such as education, relationships and personal achievements,” says David Bürgin, clinical developmental psychologist and first author of the study. Lilly Shanahan, co-leader of the study, adds: “Support services should therefore not only focus on how to cope with stress. Stable relationships, positive experiences and opportunities to experience self-efficacy are just as important.”

Nevertheless, the researchers found that psychological stress was still part of the equation. Adolescents and young adults with more severe symptoms of anxiety and depression mentioned stressful relationship experiences, conflicts, loss and personal failures significantly more often. Correspondingly, they referred to positive events such as travel, educational achievements and sports activities less frequently... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1132572

INTRO: Which major life events matter to young people? A recent study by the University of Zurich (UZH) shows that adolescents and young adults primarily cite positive, everyday developmental steps as formative events, for example school and apprenticeships, friendships, first relationships, travel and moving out of their parents’ home. UZH researchers evaluated open-ended written responses from 1,442 participants in a long-term study. Each participant was surveyed at the ages of 15, 17, 20 and 24.

The results paint a different picture than many classic studies on life events, which tend to focus on stressful experiences. Overall, 83% of the events mentioned were positive. The participants talked about school, training and apprenticeships particularly often, with these topics accounting for almost half of all mentions. Friendships and romantic relationships came in second place, at around 12%. Personal development and mental well-being accounted for about 8%, while travel and stays abroad stood at approximately 7%.

“Our results show that youth is not primarily composed of crises. Many young people primarily mention positive developmental steps such as education, relationships and personal achievements,” says David Bürgin, clinical developmental psychologist and first author of the study. Lilly Shanahan, co-leader of the study, adds: “Support services should therefore not only focus on how to cope with stress. Stable relationships, positive experiences and opportunities to experience self-efficacy are just as important.”

Nevertheless, the researchers found that psychological stress was still part of the equation. Adolescents and young adults with more severe symptoms of anxiety and depression mentioned stressful relationship experiences, conflicts, loss and personal failures significantly more often. Correspondingly, they referred to positive events such as travel, educational achievements and sports activities less frequently... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20672.html Fri, 19 Jun 2026 15:55:33 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20672.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1132109

INTRO: Removing criminal penalties for possessing cannabis for personal use, or introducing tightly controlled legalisation of cannabis, does not appear to increase levels of cannabis use. However, the commercial sale of cannabis is linked to increased health risks, with large-scale for-profit markets – such as those seen in the US and Canada – resulting in more potent products and higher rates of addiction.

These findings are reported in a study published on Wednesday, June 17, in The Lancet Psychiatry led by experts in addiction and mental health at the University of Bath in the UK, together with an international team from the Americas, Europe, Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Asia. Co-authors Professor Tom Freeman, and Dr Rachel Lees Thorne, both from the Department of Psychology at Bath, say their findings highlight the distinct effects of different policy approaches globally.

Cannabis policies are rapidly evolving worldwide. Today, they range from strict prohibition to fully commercialised legalisation. The new paper examines global changes in cannabis policy between 2000 and 2025, and how these are linked to changes in cannabis use, cannabis addiction and other psychiatric disorders.

In the UK, cannabis is a Class B controlled drug, with a maximum penalty for possession of up to five years in prison, an unlimited fine, or both. A 2025 report by the London Drugs Commission, commissioned by London Mayor Sadiq Khan, titled The Cannabis Conundrum: a way forward for London, proposed decriminalising possession of cannabis for recreational use.

Such a change could shift the focus from managing cannabis through criminal law enforcement to healthcare, and address the disproportionate level of cannabis policing found in black communities. The findings of this new global analysis indicated that when other countries had decriminalised cannabis, there was little evidence for changes in cannabis use.

Other countries have gone a step further by legalising cannabis. The first country in the world to do this was Uruguay, which today has a tightly controlled approach where adults can access a restricted range of cannabis products from pharmacies (with limits on their potency) as well as cannabis social clubs, or by growing cannabis themselves.

In Uruguay, along with other contexts in which cannabis legalisation is tightly controlled, there is little evidence of changes in cannabis use.

By contrast, in many US states and in Canada, cannabis is legally sold through well-established, for-profit markets, making cannabis widely available. In these commercialised legal markets, use of the drug has increased. Cannabis potency has also increased since the legalisation of commercial sales, along with rates of addiction among adults, characterised by people struggling to stop using the drug despite negative effects on daily life... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1132109

INTRO: Removing criminal penalties for possessing cannabis for personal use, or introducing tightly controlled legalisation of cannabis, does not appear to increase levels of cannabis use. However, the commercial sale of cannabis is linked to increased health risks, with large-scale for-profit markets – such as those seen in the US and Canada – resulting in more potent products and higher rates of addiction.

These findings are reported in a study published on Wednesday, June 17, in The Lancet Psychiatry led by experts in addiction and mental health at the University of Bath in the UK, together with an international team from the Americas, Europe, Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Asia. Co-authors Professor Tom Freeman, and Dr Rachel Lees Thorne, both from the Department of Psychology at Bath, say their findings highlight the distinct effects of different policy approaches globally.

Cannabis policies are rapidly evolving worldwide. Today, they range from strict prohibition to fully commercialised legalisation. The new paper examines global changes in cannabis policy between 2000 and 2025, and how these are linked to changes in cannabis use, cannabis addiction and other psychiatric disorders.

In the UK, cannabis is a Class B controlled drug, with a maximum penalty for possession of up to five years in prison, an unlimited fine, or both. A 2025 report by the London Drugs Commission, commissioned by London Mayor Sadiq Khan, titled The Cannabis Conundrum: a way forward for London, proposed decriminalising possession of cannabis for recreational use.

Such a change could shift the focus from managing cannabis through criminal law enforcement to healthcare, and address the disproportionate level of cannabis policing found in black communities. The findings of this new global analysis indicated that when other countries had decriminalised cannabis, there was little evidence for changes in cannabis use.

Other countries have gone a step further by legalising cannabis. The first country in the world to do this was Uruguay, which today has a tightly controlled approach where adults can access a restricted range of cannabis products from pharmacies (with limits on their potency) as well as cannabis social clubs, or by growing cannabis themselves.

In Uruguay, along with other contexts in which cannabis legalisation is tightly controlled, there is little evidence of changes in cannabis use.

By contrast, in many US states and in Canada, cannabis is legally sold through well-established, for-profit markets, making cannabis widely available. In these commercialised legal markets, use of the drug has increased. Cannabis potency has also increased since the legalisation of commercial sales, along with rates of addiction among adults, characterised by people struggling to stop using the drug despite negative effects on daily life... (MORE - no ads)]]>