Posts: Links / Born To Help - Innate Altruistic Behavior

It makes biological and evolutionary sense to help people in these types of situations: ie. situations where the cost & effort to the "helper" is very low and the payoff for the "helpee" is relatively high. As a species, this type of behaviour was probably hard-wired into our brains at a very early tribal stage when we had to build shelters and collect resources, etc. Our apparent innate generosity breaks down however in other situations.

Particularly:

- when the cost to the helper begins to approach the benefit to the helpee (I have 10 apples and I will give you 1, but if I have only have 2 apples I may not give you any.)

- situations where the helpee is abstract. (I will ruin a $100 jacket to save a drowning girl, but if a letter arrives in my mailbox asking for $100 to save a girl on the other side of the world I probably won't)

There is also the whole idea of Hamiltonian kinship that makes helpers and helpees even more complicated when both parties share the same genes.

The comparison to Chimpanzees in this article is interesting. I would have thought that other social organisms would benefit from being helpful too.

your argument doesnt make sense, cause they never ask for a 100 dollar jacket to save a girl on the other side of the world.

very early tribal stage when we had to build shelters and collect resources, etc. Our apparent innate generosity breaks down however in other situations." -Dylan

Try even much earlier then that. Any species the survives based off of living in groups evolved to have altruistic behavior.

You also mentioned that it would complicate things if you add in family members. I think the opposite, basically that altruism evolved form helping kin and eventually spread to other nonkin members of the population. Typically it goes that you are more willing to help those that share genes with you. Animals living in small groups tend to share more genes then out-group members and thus altruism evolved as a way to preserve your gene pool. In humans these evolved mechanisms for helping in small groups is now globalized and in this process has made for some very interesting behaviors.

The failure to replicate the results with chimps is most likely the fact that their test is not ecologically valid for chimps. They are testing them on assumptions that they able to engage in pointing triad test. Although there are other studies that clearly demonstrate that chimpanzees help human experimenters by retrieving an object which the experimenter is trying to reach.
For example: http://www.plosone.org/ar.../journal.pone.0007416.

I could write a entire blog on theory of mind development and cooperation across species and I suppose if anyone would actually read it I would post it. In fact I have a study I have designed in mind to look at how ones early self-evaluation of fairness for themselves translates to their development of fairness for group members. I think altruism is dependent on the ability to police others around you. If we evolved altruism with checks and balances helping would have eventually have become maladaptive considering how much wasted time and resources are put into helping cheaters.

the in group altruism has also been used to discuss racism as an evolved behavior as people of the same race are more likely to share genes. i think Dawkins discussed it in "the selfish gene" but if not, im sure i read it from some other reputable source.

Virginia, what do you think of psychopaths? Do you buy into the theory that a psychopath is actually an evolved rare trait that persists because the majority of people are altruistic, or do you think psychopathy is a disorder?

My absolute favourite line in the chimp study: "Six pairs of chimpanzees voluntarily participated in this study"

I would want to re-do that chimp study with one additional paradigm; does the stick transfer also occur if the chimp in Booth B needs it to shock another chimp, or steal his food. There is always the issue of "afforded action" (or whatever the term is). The chimp might simply be thinking "I need to do something to make something happen" and a chimp who is used to sitting in an experimental booth will most likely figure out what is the intended action. If Chimp B requests help, Chimp A may simply adhere for lack of a reason not to. The shock/stealing paradigm would be an interesting way to test this.

That is a complicated answer. I see everything though a developmental systems approach or a continuous bidirectional interaction of genes and environment.

Psychopathology arises from a combination of factors. Tendency toward aggression is one factor. Aggressive behavior is partly genetic and is so probably because in our evolutionary past some men were able to fill the niche that allowed them to aggressively take resources. If all men evolved this tendency society would not function but some men through rape and plunder were able to remain in the population.

An example of this gene is related to MAO levels, which are linked with aggression with higher levels leading toward more antisocial behaviors. These high levels and subsequent aggressive behavior however can be counteracted by the environment. A classic study with monkeys examined juvenile monkeys with high and low level of MAO. In each group some members were placed in a high stress environment and others in a low stress environment. After some significant duration of time the monkeys were placed in a community cage and observed. Monkeys with HIGH MAO displayed the highest amount of antisocial behavior in the stress group while these same monkeys fared better then those with low MAO levels from the low stress group.

This is kinda know as the Dandelion and Orchid Child. Some children (Dandelions) can make it in almost any environment...they are very hardy. While other more sensitive children (Orchids) wither away and die when placed in poor environment but when placed in nurturing environment flourish.

I think that these systems are continuous and overlapping at times. Variations in some parts of it can have long lasting effects on the entire system. A psychopath is a creation of a predisposition to antisocial behavior (which is an adaptive strategy for some people to some degree) and the environment that ultimately manipulates the expression of genes and how the brain develops.

I'm interested to learn about the relationship between MAO levels in the PFC and executive function. I am currently convinced that at least some forms of psychopathy are directly related to a break down in whatever pre-frontal cortex mechanisms regulate executive functions.

forms of psychopathy are directly related to a break down in whatever pre-frontal cortex mechanisms regulate executive functions.


>what specific aspects of executive functioning do you think are linked toward psychopathology?

-inhibitory, working memory, encoding errors, retrieval errors?

what types of pschopathology?

>Have you given any thought to biological versus primary abilities and how they might factor in? Processing that is more hardwired versus processing we learn.

>In development, young children lack executive functioning skills how do you think young children behavior (psychology) might be related to adult psychopathology in terms of functioning of the prefrontal cortex?

just some thoughts I had when I read that.