Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2016
-
Stein, John (2016): Reference module in neuroscience and biobehavioral psychology. Place of publication not identified: Elsevier
2013
-
(2013): Promise and Challenges Surrounding Culture–Gene Coevolution and Gene–Culture Interactions. In: Psychological Inquiry 24 (1), S. 64-70. DOI: 10.1080/1047840X.2013.764814
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2013.764814 Abstract: Comments on an article by Joan Y. Chiao et al. (see record 2013-09968-001). Advances in neuroscience have heavily influenced many areas of psychological research in recent years, and cultural psychology is no exception. In fact, as Joan Y. Chiao et al. emphasize in the target article, cultural psychology and neuroscience may have formed a particularly strong partnership in the business of explaining human diversity. Cultural psychology provides an explanatory framework for understanding meaningful variation in thought and behavior across cultures, and neuroscience offers explanations of how the brain and genes underlie psychological processes. By combining these two perspectives into a new field, cultural neuroscience may be well equipped to investigate the mind more completely, as arising from multiple, interacting forces from within and beyond the individual. Chiao et al. put forth an important and impressive model of cultural neuroscience, the center of which is cultur e–gene coevolution theory, or the dual inheritance theory of human behavior. The promise of cultural neuroscience, and of the study of genes and culture in particular, is great. This culture–gene research may help scientists better understand population health disparities, as Chiao et al. point out, and achieve a more nuanced, and ultimately more accurate, view of the human mind. The target article also highlights the gene–culture interaction framework, in addition to culture–gene coevolution theory, as playing an important role in understanding variation in psychological outcomes. Yet for culture–gene research more broadly to continue to make an impact, there are some important challenges that should be addressed. Chiao et al. understanding of how human diversity may be impacted by both genetic and cultural selection with an ambitious theory of culture– gene coevolution, and I commend the authors for bringing these very important issues to the forefront. Although some k ey chall enges remain to be addressed in future research—such as which cultural traits are adaptive, whether culture–gene relationships are causal, and when genetic variants should correlate and/or interact with the cultural environment—the promise of cultural neuroscience is evident. The integration of biological and neuroscientific perspectives with cultural psychology will continue to be crucial for advancing understandings of the mind, brain, and behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von 8
2008
-
(2008): Implicit and explicit processes in social cognition. In: Neuron 60 (3), S. 503-510. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.10.032
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18995826 Abstract: In this review we consider research on social cognition in which implicit processes can be compared and contrasted with explicit, conscious processes. In each case, their function is distinct, sometimes complementary and sometimes oppositional. We argue that implicit processes in social interaction are automatic and are often opposed to conscious strategies. While we are aware of explicit processes in social interaction, we cannot always use them to override implicit processes. Many studies show that implicit processes facilitate the sharing of knowledge, feelings, and actions, and hence, perhaps surprisingly, serve altruism rather than selfishness. On the other hand, higher-level conscious processes are as likely to be selfish as prosocial.
- <<
- <
- 1