|
().9(5), 265.
|
|
|
Pongrácz.
|
|
|
.
|
|
|
4Free Video Converter. 4 Free Studio. Copyright© 2000~2015 4Free Video Converter Inc. a Multimedia Utility Company.
|
|
|
Kwang Ng Aik, & Rodrigues Daphne. (2011). A Big-Five Personality Profile of the Adaptor and Innovator. J. Creativ. Behav., 36(4), 254–268.
Abstract: This study explored the relationship between two creative styles (adaptor and innovator) and the Big Five personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience). 164 teachers from 3 secondary and 2 primary schools in Singapore completed a self?report questionnaire, which consisted of the Kirton Adaption?Innovation Inventory and the NEO?Five Factor Inventory. It was found that adaptors were significantly more conscientious than innovators, while innovators were significantly more extraverted and open to experience than adaptors. No significant differences were found between adaptors and innovators in neuroticism and agreeableness. The study also revealed a meaningful pattern of relationships between the Big Five personality traits and the three facet scales of the KAI. Specifically, Sufficiency of Originality was negatively correlated with Openness to Experience and Extraversion; Rule Governance was positively correlated with conscientiousness but negatively correlated with openness to experience; Efficiency was positively correlated with conscientiousness. The overall findings supported the fundamental contention that different creative styles were due to different combinations of personality traits, with adaptors being more conscientious, while innovators being more extraverted and open to experience. These personality?based differences in creative styles between adaptors and innovators had resulted in much social conflict between them. One way of resolving it is to make known the nature and value of different creative styles to these two different types of creators.
|
|
|
Devinsky, O., Boesch, J. M., Cerda-Gonzalez, S., Coffey, B., Davis, K., Friedman, D., et al. (2018). A cross-species approach to disorders affecting brain and behaviour. Nature Reviews Neurology, .
Abstract: Structural and functional elements of biological systems are highly conserved across vertebrates. Many neurological and psychiatric conditions affect both humans and animals. A cross-species approach to the study of brain and behaviour can advance our understanding of human disorders via the identification of unrecognized natural models of spontaneous disorders, thus revealing novel factors that increase vulnerability or resilience, and via the assessment of potential therapies. Moreover, diagnostic and therapeutic advances in human neurology and psychiatry can often be adapted for veterinary patients. However, clinical and research collaborations between physicians and veterinarians remain limited, leaving this wealth of comparative information largely untapped. Here, we review pain, cognitive decline syndromes, epilepsy, anxiety and compulsions, autoimmune and infectious encephalitides and mismatch disorders across a range of animal species, looking for novel insights with translational potential. This comparative perspective can help generate novel hypotheses, expand and improve clinical trials and identify natural animal models of disease resistance and vulnerability.
|
|
|
Nakagawa, S. (2004). A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol, 15.
|
|
|
Nakagawa, S. (2004). A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. beheco, 15(6), 1044–1045.
|
|
|
Rogers, L. J. (2017). A Matter of Degree: Strength of Brain Asymmetry and Behaviour. Symmetry, 9(4).
Abstract: Research on a growing number of vertebrate species has shown that the left and right sides of the brain process information in different ways and that lateralized brain function is expressed in both specific and broad aspects of behaviour. This paper reviews the available evidence relating strength of lateralization to behavioural/cognitive performance. It begins by considering the relationship between limb preference and behaviour in humans and primates from the perspectives of direction and strength of lateralization. In birds, eye preference is used as a reflection of brain asymmetry and the strength of this asymmetry is associated with behaviour important for survival (e.g., visual discrimination of food from non-food and performance of two tasks in parallel). The same applies to studies on aquatic species, mainly fish but also tadpoles, in which strength of lateralization has been assessed as eye preferences or turning biases. Overall, the empirical evidence across vertebrate species points to the conclusion that stronger lateralization is advantageous in a wide range of contexts. Brief discussion of interhemispheric communication follows together with discussion of experiments that examined the effects of sectioning pathways connecting the left and right sides of the brain, or of preventing the development of these left-right connections. The conclusion reached is that degree of functional lateralization affects behaviour in quite similar ways across vertebrate species. Although the direction of lateralization is also important, in many situations strength of lateralization matters more. Finally, possible interactions between asymmetry in different sensory modalities is considered.
|
|
|
Amici, F., Widdig, A., Lehmann, J., & Majolo, B. (2019). A meta-analysis of interindividual differences in innovation. Anim. Behav., 155, 257–268.
Abstract: The ability to innovate and the social transmission of innovations have played a central role in human evolution. However, innovation is also crucial for other animals, by allowing them to cope with novel socioecological challenges. Although innovation plays such a central role in animals' lives, we still do not know the conditions required for innovative behaviour to emerge. Here, we focused on interindividual differences in innovation by (1) extensively reviewing existing literature on innovative behaviour in animals and (2) quantitatively testing the different evolutionary hypotheses that have been proposed to explain interindividual variation in innovation propensity during foraging tasks. We ran a series of phylogenetically controlled mixed-effects meta-regression models to determine which hypotheses (if any) are supported by currently available empirical studies. Our analyses show that innovation is more common in individuals that are older and belong to the larger sex, but also in more neophilic and/or explorative individuals. Moreover, these effects change depending on the study setting (i.e. wild versus captive). Our results provide no clear support to the excess of energy or the bad competitor hypotheses and suggest that study setting and interindividual differences in traits related to personality are also important predictors of innovation.
|
|