Search

Highlights • Selection as a causal process can help account for a wide array of phenomena in the natural sciences. • The elements in a system of selection are functionally defined by David Hull and include interactors and replicators. • These functions operate via various physical entities on many levels of analysis in both ontogenetic and phylogenetic selection processes. • Entities exhibiting these evolutionary functions can exert reciprocal influence on one another and on the selecting environment. • Understanding the integrated nature of selection frameworks can help to better develop questions and technologies in the behavioral sciences. Abstract Selection has enriched our understanding of the world since it was first applied to the evolution of species. Selection stands as an alternative to essentialist thinking, as a generalized and multiply applicable concept, and as a causal explanation for current forms within biology and behavior. Attempts to describe selection processes in a generalizable way have provided clarity about their minimal elements, such as replicators and interactors. This paper discusses the interconnectedness among different levels of selection using evidence garnered from evolutionary biology, development, epigenetics, neuroscience, and behavior analysis. Currently, it appears that replicators and interactors may be more fluid than previously supposed and that selection for particular traits may rely on both multiple levels of interaction and multiple levels of replication. Replicators, interactors, and environment share influence on one another, and different replicators may exchange critical control over similar interactor variation as evolution proceeds. Our current understanding of selection continues to undergo revision, and reference to a number of disparate fields can help to account for the complexity of these processes. An understanding of their interconnectedness may help resolve some mysteries that develop in fields that exclusively focus on one or a few, such as the focused study of behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The social and behavioral sciences are at a crossroads in public health. In this paper, we attempt to describe a path toward the further integration of the natural and behavioral sciences with respect to the study of behavior and health. Three innovations are proposed. First, we extend and modify the “stream of causation” metaphor along two axes: time, and levels of nested systems of social and biological organization. Second, we address the question of whether ‘upstream’ features of social context are causes of disease, fundamental or otherwise. Finally, we propose the concept of a risk regulator to advance the study of behavior and health in populations. To illustrate the potential of these innovations, we develop a multilevel framework for the study of health behaviors and obesity in social and biological context. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: In this paper, we investigate the impact of monitoring and social ties on moral hazard behavior within group lending programs. Our study is based on data from an extensive questionnaire held in Eritrea among participants of 102 groups. We separately analyze the impact of group leaders and other group members. We show that the monitoring and the social ties of group leaders and not the other group members reduce the moral hazard behavior within groups. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

While there is incontrovertible evidence that agents are imbued with cooperative values, considerable ambivalence exists about the rationale for cooperation. Some analysts contend that cooperative behavior is well within the realm of the Benthamite quest for utility maximization, but others perceive cooperation as driven by complex socio-cultural and psychological phenomena. In this paper, we propose an evolutionary-based explanatory framework that uses both insights to explain how cooperative behaviors are formed, as well as how they might change over time. On the basis of evidence from a traditional African society, we show how tension between utility maximization and cultural norms could shape cooperative behaviors in ways that are not easily deciphered by standard economic theory. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]