Why Do Birds False Alarm Flight?

False alarm flighting in avian flocks is common, and has been explained as a maladaptive information cascade. If false alarm flighting is maladaptive per se, then its frequency can only be explained by it being net adaptive in relation to some other benefit or equilibrium. However, I argue that natural selection cannot distinguish between false and true alarm flights that have similar energetic costs, opportunity costs, and outcomes. False alarm flighting cannot be maladaptive if natural selection cannot perceive the difference between true and false alarm flighting. Rather, the question to answer is what false and true alarm flighting both have in common that is adaptive per se. The fire drill hypothesis of alarm flighting posits that false alarm flights are an adaptive investment in practicing escape. The fire drill hypothesis predicts that all individuals can benefit from practicing escape, particularly juveniles. Flighting practice could improve recognition of and response time to alarm flighting signals, could compensate for inter-individual and within-day weight differences, and could aid the development of adaptive escape tactics. Mixed-age flocks with many juveniles are expected to false alarm flight more than adult flocks. Flocks that inhabit complex terrain should gain less from escape practice and should false alarm flight less. Behavioural ecology framings can be fruitfully complemented by other research traditions of learning and behaviour that are more focused on maturation and motor learning processes.

Re-Conceptualizing Solitude in the Digital Era: From “Being Alone” to “Noncommunication”

This article revisits the theoretical terrain surrounding solitude to address conceptual, methodological, and practical challenges manifest in the digital era. First, solitude has been approached from a number of different research traditions, resulting in disconnected streams of theory. Furthermore, these streams were developed before the rise of the Internet and mobile media. As a result, solitude is commonly, if not most commonly, conceptualized and measured as a matter of being physically alone. This article re-conceptualizes solitude as “noncommunication” to offer a more contemporary and inclusive perspective, one that uproots it from ideations of physical aloneness and replants it in social aloneness. Whereas previous theory in this area often ignores mediated interaction, we recognize it as a meaningful way for people to connect, with important implications for solitude. Our framework also calls for interrogation of key contextual factors that condition whether and how solitude is experienced in the digital era.

Restructuring insight: An integrative review of insight in problem-solving, meditation, psychotherapy, delusions and psychedelics

Occasionally a solution arrives as a sudden understanding - an insight. Insight has been considered as an “extra” ingredient of creative thinking and problem-solving. Here we propose that insight is a central process in seemingly distinct areas of research. Drawing on literature from a variety of fields, we show that besides being a common topic in problem-solving literature, insight is also a core component in psychotherapy, essential for some forms of meditation, a key process underlying the emergence of primary delusions in schizophrenia, and a factor that drives the positive outcomes of psychedelic therapy. Our goal is to bridge these different views and research traditions. In each case, we discuss the prerequisites and consequences of insight. We examine evidence for common prerequisites of insight experiences, comprising a tension within knowledge structures and a plastic state of mind. We discuss a framework for explaining insight across these fields and highlight the clinical relevance of studying insight. This integrative review provides a better understanding of insight, a central feature of our minds.

Evaluating complex interventions in context: systematic, meta-narrative review of case study approaches

Background There is a growing need for methods that acknowledge and successfully capture the dynamic interaction between context and implementation of complex interventions. Case study research has the potential to provide such understanding, enabling in-depth investigation of the particularities of phenomena. However, there is limited guidance on how and when to best use different case study research approaches when evaluating complex interventions. This study aimed to review and synthesise the literature on case study research across relevant disciplines, and determine relevance to the study of contextual influences on complex interventions in health systems and public health research. Methods Systematic meta-narrative review of the literature comprising (i) a scoping review of seminal texts (n = 60) on case study methodology and on context, complexity and interventions, (ii) detailed review of empirical literature on case study, context and complex interventions (n = 71), and (iii) identifying and reviewing ‘hybrid papers’ (n = 8) focused on the merits and challenges of case study in the evaluation of complex interventions. Results We identified four broad (and to some extent overlapping) research traditions, all using case study in a slightly different way and with different goals: 1) developing and testing complex interventions in healthcare; 2) analysing change in organisations; 3) undertaking realist evaluations; 4) studying complex change naturalistically. Each tradition conceptualised context differently—respectively as the backdrop to, or factors impacting on, the intervention; sets of interacting conditions and relationships; circumstances triggering intervention mechanisms; and socially structured practices. Overall, these traditions drew on a small number of case study methodologists and disciplines. Few studies problematised the nature and boundaries of ‘the case’ and ‘context’ or considered the implications of such conceptualisations for methods and knowledge production. Conclusions Case study research on complex interventions in healthcare draws on a number of different research traditions, each with different epistemological and methodological preferences. The approach used and consequences for knowledge produced often remains implicit. This has implications for how researchers, practitioners and decision makers understand, implement and evaluate complex interventions in different settings. Deeper engagement with case study research as a methodology is strongly recommended.

Screen Mediated Work in an Ethnography of Official Statistics

The omnipresence of screen mediated work has consequences for researchers interested in ethnographically observing digital work ‘in action’ in co-located, face-to-face, fieldwork. Researchers can encounter difficulties such as deciding how and when to observe the role of screens, and observing screen mediated work when figures and graphs appear briefly or out of view. Focussing on organizational knowledge practices, the chapter first discusses how we can conceptualize the roles of screens in digital work by reviewing five ethnographic research traditions: (1) symbolic interactionism; (2) ethnomethodology; (3) panoptic theories of power; (4) actor-network theories; (5) sociomateriality in organizational processes. Next, the chapter considers how to practically study screen mediated work via an ethnographic research project in a statistical office. On the basis of this project, we can distinguish five ‘small m’ methodological positions for conducting fieldwork in screen mediated workspaces, illustrating how ‘screen demonstration interviews’ and (participant) observation are conducted.

Digital Diaries as a Research Method for Capturing Practices in Situ

Digital diaries emerge as viable methods for capturing situated practices in research participants’ natural environments. This chapter reviews what has been learned about the affordances of diary studies from various research traditions and describes the researchers’ use of the digital diary method in different research contexts. Specifically explored is the use of digital diaries by drawing on the application of the method in studying nomadic work practices and how they help to reveal contextual details of nomadic work. The chapter thus outlines an ‘interposed approach’ where diary studies are preceded and succeeded by interviews with participants. Finally, the practical opportunities and challenges of conducting digital diaries are described.

An Evolutionary Psychology View of Forgiveness: Individuals, Groups, and Culture

We review the logic of an evolutionary perspective on forgiveness, highlighting how insight into the likely function of forgiveness--solving adaptive problems related to acquiring and maintaining social relationships--has productively guided research and theory. A combination of experimental, longitudinal, cross-sectional, and cross-cultural evidence supports the claim that victims’ perceptions of harmdoers’ relationship value and exploitation causally influence whether or not victims forgive harmdoers. We also review the nascent literature on the topic of intergroup forgiveness, and consider how the concepts associated with interpersonal forgiveness, such as apologies, relationship value, and exploitation risk might help us understand forgiveness between groups, cultures, and societies. Finally, we explore the intersection of evolutionary and cultural perspectives on forgiveness, and consider how concepts from these two research traditions might be integrated to help us understand forgiveness even better.

Rhetoric, Legitimation, and Grand Strategy

Scholars associated with diverse research traditions have increasingly agreed that legitimacy is significant in the formulation and operation of grand strategy. Despite the field’s embrace of legitimacy, scholars of international relations have shown less interest in the role of legitimation—the public justification of policy—in creating and sustaining grand strategies. This oversight is puzzling. Grand strategy only becomes legitimate when leaders articulate the reasons why policies are justifiable, and only if audiences accept those claims. Empirically, moreover, leaders devote substantial time, energy, and resources to justifying their strategy to audiences at home and abroad. To overlook legitimation is to overlook much of global politics. This chapter makes the case for treating legitimation as central to the study of grand strategy. It explains what legitimation is, why it matters, and how it drives grand strategy at every stage, from the articulation of national interest, to the interpretation of threat, to the selection of instruments. The essay concludes with challenges to the legitimation of grand strategy in contemporary international politics.