Graduate studies at Western
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):575-589 (2005)
|Abstract||Recent evidence in natural and semi-natural settings has revealed a variety of left-right perceptual asymmetries among vertebrates. These include preferential use of the left or right visual hemifield during activities such as searching for food, agonistic responses, or escape from predators in animals as different as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. There are obvious disadvantages in showing such directional asymmetries because relevant stimuli may be located to the animal's left or right at random; there is no a priori association between the meaning of a stimulus (e.g., its being a predator or a food item) and its being located to the animal's left or right. Moreover, other organisms (e.g., predators) could exploit the predictability of behavior that arises from population-level lateral biases. It might be argued that lateralization of function enhances cognitive capacity and efficiency of the brain, thus counteracting the ecological disadvantages of lateral biases in behavior. However, such an increase in brain efficiency could be obtained by each individual being lateralized without any need to align the direction of the asymmetry in the majority of the individuals of the population. Here we argue that the alignment of the direction of behavioral asymmetries at the population level arises as an “evolutionarily stable strategy” under “social” pressures occurring when individually asymmetrical organisms must coordinate their behavior with the behavior of other asymmetrical organisms of the same or different species. Key Words: asymmetry; brain evolution; brain lateralization; development; hemispheric specialization; laterality; lateralization of behavior; social behavior; theory of games.|
|Keywords||asymmetry brain evolution brain lateralization development hemispheric specialization laterality lateralization of behavior social behavior theory of games|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Michael B. Casey (2005). Developmental Systems, Evolutionarily Stable Strategies, and Population Laterality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):592-593.
Bianca Dräger, Caterina Breitenstein & Stefan Knecht (2005). Rethinking Brain Asymmetries in Humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):598-599.
Stephen F. Walker (2003). Misleading Asymmetries of Brain Structure. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):240-241.
Martina Manns (2005). The Riddle of Nature and Nurture – Lateralization has an Epigenetic Trait. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):602-603.
Douglas C. Broadfield (2005). Do Asymmetrical Differences in Primate Brains Correspond to Cerebral Lateralization? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):590-591.
Chao Deng (2005). Interactions Between Genetic and Environmental Factors Determine Direction of Population Lateralization. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):598-598.
Onur Güntürkün (2005). Darwin's Legacy and the Evolution of Cerebral Asymmetries. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):599-600.
James A. Reggia & Alexander Grushin (2005). Population Lateralization Arises in Simulated Evolution of Non-Interacting Neural Networks. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):609-611.
Maryanne Martin & Gregory V. Jones (2005). Constraints From Handedness on the Evolution of Brain Lateralization. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):603-604.
Giorgio Vallortigara & Lesley J. Rogers (2005). Forming an Asymmetrical Brain: Genes, Environment, and Evolutionarily Stable Strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):615-623.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #81,761 of 731,079 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 731,079 )
How can I increase my downloads?