Review: Learning Not simple association based on temporal contiguity: Background rate (causation)

1. Review: Learning Not simple association based on temporal contiguity: Background rate (causation) Food avoidance learning (taste-nausea) Shift vs. stay learning in hummingbirds Food vs. water in T-maze Star-compass learning in birds Vector summing in desert ants Language learning in infants Sex differences in learning mechanisms

2. Review: Learning Facultative adaptations designed (by selection) to meet real-world problems using real-world cues.

3. Individuality: Intelligence and Personality These differences have moderate heritabilities (0.35 < h2 < 0.65). What does that mean? Between 1/3 and 2/3 of the phenotypic differences between individuals are the result of genetic differences between them. (And 1/3 to 2/3 is explained by environmental differences)

4. Why is there still genetic variation in these traits? • Selectively neutral? • Sexually produced variation around polygenic optimum? • Spatial or temporal variation in selective regime? • Frequency-dependent selection? • Heterozygote advantage?

5. We are intensely social and others constitute important resources for us. • Intelligence and personality attributes describe important features of other as social resources. • Not surprising that these attributes are important components of natural language (about 5% of vocabulary in English).

6. What is intelligence? • IQ tests developed to predict success in school. • Of course there were no school in the EEA, so… • IQ tests probably don’t reflect the natural kind(s) of intelligence favored by selection during human evolution.

7. How many kinds of intelligence? g (general intelligence)? or Thurstones primary mental abilities? verbal comprehension verbal fluency number spatial memory perceptual reasoning

8. g (general intelligence)? or Thurstones primary mental abilities? Can be higher on some and low on others. So it seems that abilities can vary somewhat independently. On the other hand there is some correlation among abilities suggesting a common underlying cause (g).

9. Is g naturally or sexually selected (Miller) Sexually selected traits must be honest fitness markers. g is correlated with symmetry. Scientific, artistic, musical, etc. productivity shows the same early adulthood peak as mating effeort.

10. Other views of intelligence: 1. “Successful intelligence” (Sternberg) horse-racing handicappers, Brazillian street children, knowledge of herbal remedies.

11. 2. “Multiple intelligences” (Gardner) Linguistic Musical Logical-mathematical Spatial Bodily-kinesthetic Inter-personal Intra-personal Criteria: Selective impairment Idiots-savant Plausible evolutionary basis (!) Should there be more intelligences?

12. Human have huge brains. Very costly: 1. metabolically 2. required altriciality Perhaps this is for intelligence but it may instead be about expertise. Complex extractive foraging niche.

13. Figure 12.08

14. Figure 12.07a

15. Figure 12.07b

16. Evolutionary novelty of school: reading, writing, calculating… There are lots of things we don’t go to school to learn: e.g., the contrast between spoken and written language; languages learned as children vs. languages learned as adults; cheater detection vs. formal logic.

17. Personality Interaction style. This interaction style has a number of dimensions. Big-Five model: OCEAN

18. Openness to experience: curious broad interests, creative Conscientiousness: organized, reliable, hard-working Extraversion: bold, forceful, active, talkative Agreeableness: good-natured, trusting, helpful Neuroticism: worrying, nervous, emotional These define adaptive solutions to problems in the social landscape

19. Variation in personality could be due to any of previously listed causes: Selectively neutral? Sexually produced variation around polygenic optimum? Spatial or temporal variation in selective regime? Frequency-dependent selection? Heterozygote advantage? And some may also be facultative.