Cargando…
Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence
Since Seligman (1971) statement that the vast majority of phobias are about objects essential to the survival of a species, a multitude of laboratory studies followed, supporting the finding that humans learn to fear and detect snakes (and other animals) faster than other stimuli. Most of these stud...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6749087/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31572273 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02094 |
_version_ | 1783452206632009728 |
---|---|
author | Coelho, Carlos M. Suttiwan, Panrapee Faiz, Abul M. Ferreira-Santos, Fernando Zsido, Andras N. |
author_facet | Coelho, Carlos M. Suttiwan, Panrapee Faiz, Abul M. Ferreira-Santos, Fernando Zsido, Andras N. |
author_sort | Coelho, Carlos M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Since Seligman (1971) statement that the vast majority of phobias are about objects essential to the survival of a species, a multitude of laboratory studies followed, supporting the finding that humans learn to fear and detect snakes (and other animals) faster than other stimuli. Most of these studies used schematic drawings, images, or pictures of snakes, and only a small amount of fieldwork in naturalistic environments was done. We address fear preparedness theories and automatic fast detection data from mainstream laboratory data and compare it with ethobehavioral information relative to snakes, predator-prey interaction, and snakes’ defensive kinematics strikes in order to analyze their potential matching. From this analysis, four main findings arose, namely that (1) snakebites occur when people are very close to the snake and are unaware or unable to escape the bite; (2) human visual detection and escape response is slow compared to the speed of snake strikes; (3) in natural environments, snake experts are often unable to see snakes existing nearby; (4) animate objects in general capture more attention over other stimuli and dangerous, but recent objects in evolutionary terms are also able to be detected fast. The issues mentioned above pose several challenges to evolutionary psychology-based theories expecting to find special-purpose neural modules. The older selective habituation hypothesis (Schleidt, 1961) that prey animals start with a rather general predator image from which specific harmless cues are removed by habituation might deserve reconsideration. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6749087 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67490872019-09-30 Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence Coelho, Carlos M. Suttiwan, Panrapee Faiz, Abul M. Ferreira-Santos, Fernando Zsido, Andras N. Front Psychol Psychology Since Seligman (1971) statement that the vast majority of phobias are about objects essential to the survival of a species, a multitude of laboratory studies followed, supporting the finding that humans learn to fear and detect snakes (and other animals) faster than other stimuli. Most of these studies used schematic drawings, images, or pictures of snakes, and only a small amount of fieldwork in naturalistic environments was done. We address fear preparedness theories and automatic fast detection data from mainstream laboratory data and compare it with ethobehavioral information relative to snakes, predator-prey interaction, and snakes’ defensive kinematics strikes in order to analyze their potential matching. From this analysis, four main findings arose, namely that (1) snakebites occur when people are very close to the snake and are unaware or unable to escape the bite; (2) human visual detection and escape response is slow compared to the speed of snake strikes; (3) in natural environments, snake experts are often unable to see snakes existing nearby; (4) animate objects in general capture more attention over other stimuli and dangerous, but recent objects in evolutionary terms are also able to be detected fast. The issues mentioned above pose several challenges to evolutionary psychology-based theories expecting to find special-purpose neural modules. The older selective habituation hypothesis (Schleidt, 1961) that prey animals start with a rather general predator image from which specific harmless cues are removed by habituation might deserve reconsideration. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6749087/ /pubmed/31572273 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02094 Text en Copyright © 2019 Coelho, Suttiwan, Faiz, Ferreira-Santos and Zsido. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Coelho, Carlos M. Suttiwan, Panrapee Faiz, Abul M. Ferreira-Santos, Fernando Zsido, Andras N. Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence |
title | Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence |
title_full | Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence |
title_fullStr | Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence |
title_full_unstemmed | Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence |
title_short | Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence |
title_sort | are humans prepared to detect, fear, and avoid snakes? the mismatch between laboratory and ecological evidence |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6749087/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31572273 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02094 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT coelhocarlosm arehumanspreparedtodetectfearandavoidsnakesthemismatchbetweenlaboratoryandecologicalevidence AT suttiwanpanrapee arehumanspreparedtodetectfearandavoidsnakesthemismatchbetweenlaboratoryandecologicalevidence AT faizabulm arehumanspreparedtodetectfearandavoidsnakesthemismatchbetweenlaboratoryandecologicalevidence AT ferreirasantosfernando arehumanspreparedtodetectfearandavoidsnakesthemismatchbetweenlaboratoryandecologicalevidence AT zsidoandrasn arehumanspreparedtodetectfearandavoidsnakesthemismatchbetweenlaboratoryandecologicalevidence |