Source author record

Edwin S. Dalmaijer

Edwin S. Dalmaijer appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

The human behavioural immune system is a product of cultural evolution

Disgust is a basic emotion that serves to avoid contaminants, and is central to the behavioural immune system. While disgust-motivated avoidance occurs in bonobos and chimpanzees, humans show uniquely high levels of contamination sensitivity. Current theory postulates that human disgust is primarily a genetic adaptation, side-lining social transmission and denying parental modelling. Here, we test whether this strong view is warranted by simulating 100000 years of cultural and biological evolution in various scenarios. We modelled disgust as a trait that governed the extent to which individuals forewent potentially contaminated nutrition. This lowered their risk of gastrointestinal illness, at the cost of increasing starvation risk and birth-interval. As environmental levels and costs of contamination rose, so did relative fitness of high-disgust individuals. Evolutionary shifts in disgust as polygenic trait occurred as a consequence of germ-cell mutations, but were most prominent in populations with high initial genetic variance. Crucially, cultural transmission between generations operated at a higher rate, even if parental modelling was eliminated. This study serves not only as evidence of cultural evolution shaping the behavioural immune system, but also as an illustration of emerging theories that paint affective and cognitive mechanisms as socially transmitted rather than biologically determined functions.

preprint2021arXiv

Banana for scale: Gauging trends in academic interest by normalising publication rates to common and innocuous keywords

Many academics use yearly publication numbers to quantify academic interest for their research topic. While such visualisations are ubiquitous in grant applications, manuscript introductions, and review articles, they fail to account for the rapid growth in scientific publications. As a result, any search term will likely show an increase in supposed "academic interest". One proposed solution is to normalise yearly publication rates by field size, but this is arduous and difficult. Here, we propose an simpler index that normalises keywords of interest by a ubiquitous and innocuous keyword, such as "banana". Alternatively, one could opt for field-specific keywords or hierarchical structures (e.g. PubMed's Medical Subject Headings, MeSH) to compute "interest market share". Using this approach, we uncovered plausible trends in academic interest in examples from the medical literature. In neuroimaging, we found that not the supplementary motor area (as was previously claimed), but the prefrontal cortex is the most interesting part of the brain. In cancer research, we found a contemporary preference for cancers with high prevalence and clinical severity, and notable declines in interest for more treatable or likely benign neoplasms. Finally, we found that interest in respiratory viral infections spiked when strains showed potential for pandemic involvement, with SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic being the most extreme example. In sum, the time is ripe for a quick and easy method to quantify trends in academic interest for anecdotal purposes. We provide such a method, along with software for researchers looking to implement it in their own writing.