Literature DB >> 29118128

A valence-free definition of sociality as any violation of inter-individual independence.

Peggy Mason1, Haozhe Shan2.   

Abstract

Well over 90% of studies in biomedical sciences are performed on single animals. While knowledge of the genetics, development and physiology of single individuals accrues, an understanding of the biological mechanisms by which individuals interact has barely budged. Yet many of society's greatest problems derive from an inability of humans to get along with each other. Studies in social neuroscience are primarily observational and rarely employ subjects who physically interact. Thus, social interaction represents a largely unexplored frontier of biology. The neuroscience that underlies social behaviour and interactions can and should be studied using the scientific method. However, a workable and objective definitional framework of sociality is needed for scientific progress in this field. Here we propose a definition that uses a test of independence from the presence of others. The null hypothesis is that a behaviour is independent from the influence of others. Rejection of this null hypothesis means that the actions of an individual depend on the actions of one or more other individuals. This definition has the advantages of not being contaminated by moral judgements or biases in favour of pro-social behaviour, and of being applicable to a wide range of physiological processes. The definition of a social behaviour proposed here says nothing regarding the valence of the behaviour with respect to others. Thus, a behaviour that is influenced by the presence of others may benefit, harm, or have no effect on others. It is hoped that this definitional framework for sociality will facilitate our understanding of the origins and mechanisms of social behaviour among animals including humans as well as offer efficacious approaches to social disorders such as autism.
© 2017 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  behaviour; bystander effect; empathy; helping; social behaviour

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29118128      PMCID: PMC5698633          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.0948

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  10 in total

Review 1.  Social buffering: relief from stress and anxiety.

Authors:  Takefumi Kikusui; James T Winslow; Yuji Mori
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-12-29       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination.

Authors:  Jonathan Winawer; Nathan Witthoft; Michael C Frank; Lisa Wu; Alex R Wade; Lera Boroditsky
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-04-30       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Toward a second-person neuroscience.

Authors:  Leonhard Schilbach; Bert Timmermans; Vasudevi Reddy; Alan Costall; Gary Bente; Tobias Schlicht; Kai Vogeley
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 12.579

4.  Commensal bacteria play a role in mating preference of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Gil Sharon; Daniel Segal; John M Ringo; Abraham Hefetz; Ilana Zilber-Rosenberg; Eugene Rosenberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  How language shapes thought.

Authors:  Lera Boroditsky
Journal:  Sci Am       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.142

6.  Empathy and pro-social behavior in rats.

Authors:  Inbal Ben-Ami Bartal; Jean Decety; Peggy Mason
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-12-09       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Oxytocin-dependent consolation behavior in rodents.

Authors:  J P Burkett; E Andari; Z V Johnson; D C Curry; F B M de Waal; L J Young
Journal:  Science       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 8.  Is eating behavior manipulated by the gastrointestinal microbiota? Evolutionary pressures and potential mechanisms.

Authors:  Joe Alcock; Carlo C Maley; C Athena Aktipis
Journal:  Bioessays       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 4.345

9.  When Brain Beats Behavior: Neuroforecasting Crowdfunding Outcomes.

Authors:  Alexander Genevsky; Carolyn Yoon; Brian Knutson
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Rats do not eat alone in public: Food-deprived rats socialize rather than competing for baits.

Authors:  Omri Weiss; Alex Dorfman; Tamar Ram; Pazit Zadicario; David Eilam
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total
  3 in total

1.  Humans as a model for understanding biological fundamentals.

Authors:  Sarah F Brosnan; Erik Postma
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Humans as model organisms.

Authors:  Kim Sterelny
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  The bystander effect in rats.

Authors:  John L Havlik; Yuri Y Vieira Sugano; Maura Clement Jacobi; Rahul R Kukreja; John H Clement Jacobi; Peggy Mason
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 14.136

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.