Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Chapter 6 Social Development Early Child Development • • • • Gradual progression to full theory of mind Genetic component driving the stages Environmental interaction Social cognition a necessity for more advanced human social development Development • What is the purpose of childhood? • Humans have extended period before becoming reproductively capable – Doesn’t this cut into reproductive success? • Ultimate explanation: childhood prepares for adult reproductive phase Life History Theory • LHTs see development processes as means of maximizing inclusive fitness • Development not a passive process • “Decisions” during development may be due to environmental factors interacting with genes Principle of Allocation • Somatic effort – Foraging, survival, learning, growth, etc. • Reproductive effort – Mating, producing, and rearing offspring • Trade-offs • No single/unique method for optimization Reproductive Effort • Broadly speaking, two techniques – Quantity: many offspring, limited investment – Quality: few offspring, high investment • Environmental constraints determine which strategy will be most successful • Male/female differences Reproductive Strategies: Terms • Between species – r: produce as many offspring as possible – K: produce few offspring • Between individuals – C: maximize current fitness – F: maximize future fitness – From parent’s or offspring’s perspective Offspring Predicting the Future • Attachment strategies due (in part) to interaction with parents • Childhood condition serves as model for future when reproductive phase reached • How stable/unstable will future be? • Attempt to maximize reproductive success – Stable --> future fitness – Unstable --> current fitness Correlations with Father Absent • Precocious sexual development • Boys more aggressive, rebellious, sexually exploitative as adults • Girls have negative sexual attitudes, fewer longterm monogamous relationships as adults • Single mother family lower economics, lower resources • Offspring adopt “current” reproductive strategy to maximize inclusive fitness Early Environment • Maternal attachment theory – John Bowlby, Mary Ainsworth, Jay Belsky • Insecure avoidant (~25%) – Shorter-term relationships • Secure attachment (~65%) – Long-lasting, stable relationships • Insecure resistant (~10%) – Over commitment to few relationships Selection • Insecure avoidant and insecure resistant seem maladaptive (should have been selected against) • But, possibly optimal given different lifehistory environments • Different attachment styles (acquired during development) let offspring “plan” for future Belsky (1997) • Secure attachment – Stable developmental environment – Parenting over reproduction (maximize quality over quantity; future) • Insecure-avoidant – Availability of resources low, parental attention irregular/inconsistent/unwilling – Reproduction over parenting (maximize quantity over quality; current) • Insecure-resistant – Speculative; parents unable to contribute? – Reduce direct fitness, but gain some inclusive Genes and Environment • How much of development is genetically regulated? • Environment does interact with genome, but to what extent and when? • What aspects of the environment are significant for development? Behavioural Genetics • Identifying gene-environment interactions for specific behaviours • The old nature-nurture issue • Monozygotic and dizygotic twins, biological siblings, adopted siblings • Same or different environment • Look for variation in behaviour Identical Twin Studies • Genes account for some 40-50% of variability, environment 50-60% • Shared environment – Factors common to all siblings – 0-10% of environment variability • Non-shared (unique) environment – Factors specific to an individual – 40-50% of environment variability Non-shared Environment • E.g., sickness, specific teacher, uterine environment • Experiences that one child has but his/her siblings do not • Peer groups could be very significant • Group Socialization Theory – Judith Harris (1995, 1998) Group Socialization Theory • Peers better role model for child than parents • Harris argues parents (adults) provide very little actual guidance/control over socialization development Harris: Why Imitate the Young? • Youth are innovators; cultural innovation can increase fitness • Imitating peers over parents increases behavioural variability in culture • Parents may not always be around; peer groups always are • Parents and children often have competing interests • Individual, not culture that is level of selection • Again, culture not the level of selection • In EEA orphans have bigger problems than no role-model parent; likely to starve, etc. Any adopting adult could serve as teaching model • Children also compete with their peers, not just their parents Evaluation: Parents have Little Lasting Socialization Influence • Many early childhood developmental studies disagree • E.g., best predictor of child’s verbal ability is amount parents talk and/or read to child • However, there are the behavioural genetics findings of identical twins reared together or apart Evaluation: Importance of Peers • At this point, Harris’ assertions are somewhat “just-so stories” • E.g., Different attitudes in two siblings could be due to the children joining different peer groups, but what motivates joining different groups? • Could be chance factors (see Pinker 2002) or interaction between parental behaviour and child personality (see Vandell 2000) Belsky (2005) • Children differentially susceptible to parental influence; an adaptation in and of itself – In stable environment beneficial for children to imitate parents – In unstable environment, what worked in your parents’ generation may not apply to yours • World goes through periods of stability and instability – Might be adaptive for parents to have offspring that will be differentially susceptible, depending on environmental conditions – Belsky proposes ice ages as mechanisms – But, what about different ethnic groups, or pre- Out of Africa period? Social Development: Morality • The individual is the evolutionary unit of selection • Doesn’t moral behaviour act to benefit the group, though? • Moral behaviour may have direct benefit to individuals in the group, though • Also, remember that in the EEA the group would have contained more genetic relatives Benefit the Group, Benefit Self • A stable group is a safe, secure group • The individual in such a group, benefits from a predictable, stable environment • This can lead to improved fitness Example: Reciprocity and Cheating • Reciprocal arrangements benefit both parties (i.e., everybody wins) • By cheating, one benefits, one loses • If cheating becomes common, no benefit to initiating a reciprocal altruistic interaction • Now, no one benefits • Difficult to structure social interactions in an entirely selfish environment • If group breaks up, e.g., may be harder to find food, provide shelter, gain mates, childrear, etc. Textbook • • • • Origins of morality Variability of morality Universal morality Well covered in text, so I’m going to leave it for you to go through this content on your own Mirror Neurons • Scattered throughout premotor cortex, centres for language, empathy, pain • Fire when certain actions are preformed by or observed in someone else • “Mental imitation” of witnessed (or heard) actions Discovery • Giacomo Rizzolatti, Vitorio Gallese, & Leonardo Fogassi • “Raisin incident” • Macaque monkey with electrodes in premotor cortex • Published in 1996 Locations in Humans • More mirror neurons in more places than in monkeys • Premotor cortex (movement) • Inferior parietal areas (perception) • Posterior parietal lobe, superior temporal sulcus, & insula (comprehend another’s feelings, understand intention, and use language) Role • Learning through imitation • Understanding meaning or intention of action Gallese, et al. (2005) • Subjects listened to sentences describing actions • Same mirror neurons fired as would have if subjects had done the action or seen the action performed • Mirror neurons responded to abstract representation (i.e., language) Mirror Neuron Sets • Iacoboni et al. (2005) • Basic set: corresponding to an action’s most essential form (e.g., reaching) • Supplemental sets: selectively fire according to action’s perceived purpose (e.g., picking up glass to drink or to clear away mess on table) • Role in understanding intentionality Empathy • Wicker (2005) • Feeling disgust and seeing a look of disgust activated same set of mirror neurons in insula • Allows direct “understanding” of someone else’s emotional state • Social cohesion Mirror Neuron Failure • Autism • Mirror neuron trouble may link to problems with language, learning, and empathy Studies with Autistics • Autistic children showed less mirror neuron activity than normal children when watching finger movement (basic set failure) • Both autistic and nonautistic teens imitated and identify distinctive facial expressions, but the autistics didn’t show mirror neuron activity (supplemental set failure); autistics know the expression cognitively, but felt no empathy