The evolution and biological correlates of hand preferences in anthropoid primates

The evolution of human right-handedness has been intensively debated for decades. Manual lateralization patterns in non-human primates have the potential to elucidate evolutionary determinants of human handedness. However, restricted species samples and inconsistent methodologies are limiting comparative phylogenetic studies. By combining original data with published literature reports, we assembled data on hand preferences for standardized object manipulation in 1,806 individuals from 38 species of anthropoid primates, including monkeys, apes, and humans. Based on that, we employ quantitative phylogenetic methods to test prevalent hypotheses on the roles of ecology, brain size and tool use in primate handedness evolution. We confirm that human right-handedness represents an unparalleled extreme among anthropoids and found taxa displaying significant population-level handedness to be notably rare. Species-level direction of manual lateralization was largely uniform among non-human primates and neither correlated with phylogeny nor with any of the selected biological predictors. In contrast, we recovered highly variable patterns of hand preference strength, which show signatures of both ecology and phylogeny. In particular, terrestrial primates tend to display weaker hand preferences than arboreal species. These results challenge popular ideas on primate handedness evolution, especially the postural origins hypothesis. Furthermore, they point to a potential adaptive benefit of disparate lateralization strength in primates, a measure of hand preference that has often been overlooked in the past. Finally, our data show that human lateralization patterns do not align with trends found among other anthropoids, suggesting that unique selective pressures gave rise to the unusual hand preferences displayed by our species.

Fraud Beliefs Following the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election: A Belief Systems Analysis

Beliefs that the 2020 Presidential election was fraudulent are prevalent across the U.S. despite substantial contradictory evidence. We surveyed 1642 Americans during the U.S. Presidential vote count on November 4-5, assessing fraud beliefs and presenting hypothetical election outcomes before key states were decided. Participants’ fraud beliefs increased when their preferred candidate lost and decreased when he won, and this effect scaled with preference strength. A Bayesian model accounts for this bias as reflecting a rational attribution process operating on biased prior beliefs about the true election winner and beneficiary of fraud. Our findings suggest that a systems approach targeting multiple beliefs simultaneously may be more fruitful in combating false beliefs than direct “debunking” attempts.

Temporal oscillations in preference strength provide evidence for an open system model of constructed preference

The decision process is often conceptualized as a constructive process in which a decision maker accumulates information to form preferences about the choice options and ultimately make a response. Here we examine how these constructive processes unfold by tracking dynamic changes in preference strength. Across two experiments, we observed that mean preference strength systematically oscillated over time and found that eliciting a choice early in time strongly affected the pattern of preference oscillation later in time. Preferences following choices oscillated between being stronger than those without prior choice and being weaker than those without choice. To account for these phenomena, we develop an open system dynamic model which merges the dynamics of Markov random walk processes with those of quantum walk processes. This model incorporates two sources of uncertainty: epistemic uncertainty about what preference state a decision maker has at a particular point in time; and ontic uncertainty about what decision or judgment will be observed when a person has some preference state. Representing these two sources of uncertainty allows the model to account for the oscillations in preference as well as the effect of choice on preference formation.

How prior pair-bonding experience affects future bonding behavior in monogamous prairie voles

Monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) form mating-based pair bonds. Although wild prairie voles rarely re-pair following loss of a partner, laboratory studies have shown that previous pairing and mating does not negate the ability to form a new partner preference. However, little is known about how prior bond experience may alter the trajectory and display of a new pair bond. In the present study, we disrupted an initial pair bond by separating partners and then varied the amount of time before a new partner was introduced. We assessed how separation time affected the stability of partner preference over time and influenced decision-making in male voles performing a head-to-head partner preference test in which they chose between the first and second partner. We found that the ability to consistently display a preference for the second partner, supplanting the initial pair bond, depended on how long the test animal was separated from their first partner. Prior bonding experience also shaped the subsequent effects of mating on partner preference. Partner preference strength was sensitive to latency to mate with the second partner but not the first partner, irrespective of separation time. These results suggest that the ability to form a consistent, strong preference for a new partner after an initial pair bond depends upon the amount of time that has passed since separation from the first partner. These results provide valuable insight into how social bonds are dynamically shaped by prior social experience and identify variables that contribute to recovery from partner loss and the ability to form a new pair bond.

An open system model of decision-making and temporal oscillations in preference strength

Contemporary theories of choice posit that decision making is a constructive process in which a decision maker uses information about the choice options to generate support for various decisions and judgments, then uses these decisions and judgments to reduce their uncertainty about their own preferences. Here we examine how these constructive processes unfold by tracking dynamic changes in preference strength. Across two experiments, we observed that mean preference strength oscillated over time and found that eliciting a choice strongly affected the pattern of oscillation. Preferences following choices oscillated between being stronger than those without prior choice (bolstering) and being weaker than those without choice (suppression). An open system model, merging epistemic uncertainty about how a person reacts to options and ontic uncertainty about how their preference is affected by choice, accounts for the oscillations resulting in both bolstering and suppression effects.