We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The fully revised fifth edition of this highly acclaimed undergraduate textbook provides a thought-provoking introduction to evolutionary psychology, while assuming no prior knowledge of evolutionary theory. The authors continue to carefully guide students towards a level of understanding where they can critically apply evolutionary theory to psychological explanation, providing an engaging and balanced discussion of the field. New material has been added on female homosexuality, artificial intelligence and language, cooking and human brain expansion, Covid-19 and rates of evolutionary change, and the effects of digital media on mental health. This edition also has new and revised boxed case studies, many new figures, extra discussion questions, and additional further reading suggestions. The text is accompanied by online resources including an updated test bank and lecture slides, as well as new answers to the end-of-chapter questions. This is essential reading for students taking undergraduate and graduate courses in evolutionary psychology.
With the increased use of computer-based tests in clinical and research settings, assessing retest reliability and reliable change of NIH Toolbox-Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) and Cogstate Brief Battery (Cogstate) is essential. Previous studies used mostly White samples, but Black/African Americans (B/AAs) must be included in this research to ensure reliability.
Method:
Participants were B/AA consensus-confirmed healthy controls (HCs) (n = 49) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) (n = 34) adults 60–85 years that completed NIHTB-CB and Cogstate for laptop at two timepoints within 4 months. Intraclass correlations, the Bland-Altman method, t-tests, and the Pearson correlation coefficient were used. Cut scores indicating reliable change provided.
Results:
NIHTB-CB composite reliability ranged from .81 to .93 (95% CIs [.37–.96]). The Fluid Composite demonstrated a significant difference between timepoints and was less consistent than the Crystallized Composite. Subtests were less consistent for MCIs (ICCs = .01–.89, CIs [−1.00–.95]) than for HCs (ICCs = .69–.93, CIs [.46–.92]). A moderate correlation was found for MCIs between timepoints and performance on the Total Composite (r = -.40, p = .03), Fluid Composite (r = -.38, p = .03), and Pattern Comparison Processing Speed (r = -.47, p = .006).
On Cogstate, HCs had lower reliability (ICCs = .47–.76, CIs [.05–.86]) than MCIs (ICCs = .65–.89, CIs [.29–.95]). Identification reaction time significantly improved between testing timepoints across samples.
Conclusions:
The NIHTB-CB and Cogstate for laptop show promise for use in research with B/AAs and were reasonably stable up to 4 months. Still, differences were found between those with MCI and HCs. It is recommended that race and cognitive status be considered when using these measures.
Validated computerized assessments for cognitive functioning are crucial for older individuals and those at risk of cognitive decline. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) exhibits good construct validity but requires validation in diverse populations and for adults aged 85+. This study uses data from the Assessing Reliable Measurement in Alzheimer’s Disease and cognitive Aging study to explore differences in the factor structure of the NIHTB-CB for adults 85 and older, Black participants versus White participants, and those diagnosed as amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI) vs cognitively normal (CN).
Method:
Subtests from the NACC UDS-3 and NIHTB-CB were administered to 503 community-dwelling Black and White adults ages 55–99 (367 CN; 136 aMCI). Confirmatory factor analyses were used to investigate the original factor structure of NIHTB-CB that forms the basis for NIHTB-CD Index factor scores.
Results:
Factor analyses for all participants and some participant subsets (aMCI, White, 85+) substantiated the two anticipated factors (Fluid and Crystallized). However, while Black aMCI participants had the expected two-factor structure, for Black CN participants, the List Sorting Working Memory and Picture Sequence tests loaded on the Crystallized factor.
Conclusions:
Findings provide psychometric support for the NIHTB-CB. Differences in factor structure between Black CN individuals and Black aMCI individuals suggest potential instability across levels of cognitive impairment. Future research should explore changes in NIHTB-CB across diagnoses in different populations.
England and Wales have no public law libraries, so how does the general public find legal information? This article, written by Abi Reader, Assistant Librarian at Certara Predictive Technologies, provides a starting point in understanding the availability of publicly available legal information. It explores the intersection of two austerity measures, cuts to legal aid and public library spending, through searching public library catalogues for primary sources of law. Public libraries provide computers and internet access to search free online legal information sites but overall provide limited access to print law reports. This article is based on research presented at the 54th Annual BIALL Conference.
Identify which NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) subtest(s) best differentiate healthy controls (HC) from those with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and compare the discriminant accuracy between a model using a priori “Norm Adjusted” scores versus “Unadjusted” standard scores with age, sex, race/ethnicity, and education controlled for within the model. Racial differences were also examined.
Methods:
Participants were Black/African American (B/AA) and White consensus-confirmed (HC = 96; aMCI = 62) adults 60–85 years old that completed the NIHTB-CB for tablet. Discriminant function analysis (DFA) was used in the Total Sample and separately for B/AA (n = 80) and White participants (n = 78).
Results:
Picture Sequence Memory (an episodic memory task) was the highest loading coefficient across all DFA models. When stratified by race, differences were noted in the pattern of the highest loading coefficients within the DFAs. However, the overall discriminant accuracy of the DFA models in identifying HCs and those with aMCI did not differ significantly by race (B/AA, White) or model/score type (Norm Adjusted versus Unadjusted).
Conclusions:
Racial differences were noted despite the use of normalized scores or demographic covariates—highlighting the importance of including underrepresented groups in research. While the models were fairly accurate at identifying consensus-confirmed HCs, the models proved less accurate at identifying White participants with an aMCI diagnosis. In clinical settings, further work is needed to optimize computerized batteries and the use of NIHTB-CB norm adjusted scores is recommended. In research settings, demographically corrected scores or within model correction is suggested.
The concept of need plays a significant but still relatively unexplored role in philosophy. In September 2003 The Royal Institute of Philosophy funded a conference held at Hatfield College, Durham, England, where philosophers from around the world devoted an enjoyable weekend to further exploration.1 In everyday political life, scepticism about the importance of needs seems to be abating, perhaps reflecting an increased confidence among needs-theorists, grounded in years of painstaking analysis and argument on the margins of mainstream philosophy. This increased confidence freed participants at the conference to work less defensively and more constructively, and to extend their depth and range of their work. One happy result is that new aspects of the philosophy of need are identified and explored in this volume.
Aristotle’s account of human needs is valuable because it describes the connections between logical, metaphysical, physical, human and ethical necessities. But Aristotle does not fully draw out the implications of the account of necessity for needs and virtue. The proper Aristotelian conclusion is that, far from being an inferior activity fit only for slaves, meeting needs is the first part of Aristotelian virtue.
Appeals to need abound in everyday discussion. People make claims about their own needs all the time, and they do so in a way that suggests these should have a certain moral force. Needs also play an important role in contemporary popular discourse about social justice, climate change, obligations to future generations, dealing fairly with refugees, treating animals humanely, and critiques of consumerist lifestyles – to name just a few of the many examples. The idea of need is present in an increasing number of debates and domains. There is interest in need from several disciplines, not just philosophy, which also include psychology, economics, political science, social work and sociology. This volume, then, offers a fine introduction to an increasingly important concept in day-to-day life. In a new Foreword, Gillian Brock discusses the continuing significance of several innovative chapters in the book, indicating how they presaged new directions in philosophical conversation.
Diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) include a report of cognitive decline from the patient or a close informant. It is therefore important to understand the relationship between self- and informant-rated cognition and actual patient performance. Furthermore, it is unknown whether the nature of the relationship between the patient and their informant impacts accuracy of subjective reports. This study aimed to determine the association between informant report, self-report and objective cognitive performance based on relationship factors. We predicted that informant report would be more closely associated with objective performance than self-report after controlling for demographics and mood (Geriatric Depression Scale [mean= 1.4, SD=2]), especially among those who live with the participant and those who are spouses/partners.
Participants and Methods:
Participants (n = 338; age= 73.5 ±6.7) of varying diagnoses and their respective informants were drawn from the longitudinal cohort of the Michigan Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center (MADRC). The majority of informants were spouses/significant others (55.6%), followed by 23.7% being other family members and 20.7% were non- family members; 58.9% of informants live with the participant. Both respondents completed the Cognitive Change Index (CCI) to rate the patient’s cognitive status (higher scores indicating worsening cognition) across three domains: memory (12 questions), language (1 question), and attention/executive functioning (7 questions). These domains were matched to objective cognitive performance measured using the MADRC neuropsychological battery. Executive functioning and attention were assessed using Number Span Test Forward and Backward (NSF, NSB) and Trail Making Test Part B and Trail- Making Test Part A and B ratio (TMTB, TMTB: A); memory was measured using Craft Story 21 (Immediate and Delayed), Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) Total Recall, Delayed Recall, and Benson Complex Figure (BCF) Delayed Recall; and Language was measured by the Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) and Animal fluency.
Results:
Linear regression adjusted for sex, race, and mood indicated that both patient and informant CCI ratings were significantly (p<.05) associated with objective cognitive performance. For every one unit increase on executive CCI items, there was a significant decline in executive functioning (NSF patient and informant ß= -0.09, NSB: [ßP= -.14; ßp-0.13]) and TMTB [ßP= 3.85; ß= 3.10 [% change]). Memory performance also declined per unit increase on CCI memory items: (Craft Story 21 Immediate [ßP=-0.32; ß= -0.37] and Delayed [ßP=-.40; ßp -.47], HVLT-R Total Recall [ßP= -.31; ßI=-.37] and Delayed Recall [ßP= -.16; ß=-.20], and BCF Delayed Recall [ßP= -.18; ß= -.23]. Similarly, one unit increase on the single CCI language item was associated with a decline in COWAT (ßP= -2.27; ß= -4.61) and Animal fluency (ßP= -1.88; ß= -3.03). Effect modification by participant-informant relationship type or participant-informant cohabitation was not significant.
Conclusions:
Patient and informant ratings are associated with objective measures of cognition regardless of the relationship between informant and patient or if they live together. This study was limited by a well-educated sample (mean= 16.1 years of education, SD= 2.4 years) with relatively limited diversity among participant-informant relationships. Future studies should replicate analyses across a larger and more diverse sample.
Telecommunication-assisted neuropsychological assessment (teleNP) has become more widespread, particularly in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, comparatively few studies have evaluated in-home teleNP testing and none, to our knowledge, have evaluated the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center’s (NACC) Uniform Data Set version 3 tele-adapted test battery (UDS v3.0 t-cog). The current study compares in-home teleNP administration of the UDS v3.0, acquired while in-person activities were suspended due to COVID-19, with a prior in-person UDS v3.0 evaluation.
Participants and Methods:
210 participants from the Michigan Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center’s longitudinal study of memory and aging completed both an in-person UDS v3.0 and a subsequent teleNP UDS v3.0 evaluation. The teleNP UDS v3.0 was administered either via video conference (n = 131), telephone (n = 75), or hybrid format (n = 4) with approximately 16 months between evaluations (mean = 484.7 days; SD = 122.4 days; range = 320-986 days). The following clinical phenotypes were represented at the initial assessment period (i.e., the most recent in-person UDS v3.0 evaluation prior to the teleNP UDS v3.0): cognitively healthy (n = 138), mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 60), dementia (n = 11), and impaired not MCI (n = 1). Tests included both the in-person and teleNP UDS v3.0 measures, as well as the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) and Letter “C” Fluency.
Results:
We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with raw scores from each time point for the entire sample. Sub-analyses were conducted for each phenotype among participants with an unchanged consensus research diagnosis: cognitively healthy (n = 122), MCI (n = 47), or cognitively impaired (i.e., MCI, dementia, and impaired not MCI) (n = 66). Test-retest reliability across modalities and clinical phenotypes was, in general, moderate. The poorest agreement was associated with the Trail Making Test (TMT) - A (ICC = 0.00; r = 0.027), TMT - B (ICC = 0.26; r = 0.44), and Number Span Backward (ICC = 0.49). The HVLT-R demonstrated moderate reliability overall (ICC = 0.51-0.68) but had notably weak reliability for cognitively healthy participants (ICC = 0.12-0.36). The most favorable reliability was observed in Craft Story 21 Recall - Delayed (ICC = 0.77), Letter Fluency (C, F, and L) (ICC = 0.74), Multilingual Naming Test (MINT) (ICC = 0.75), and Benson Complex Figure – Delayed (ICC = 0.79).
Conclusions:
Even after accounting for the inherent limitations of this study (e.g., significant lapse of time between testing intervals), our findings suggest that the UDS v3.0 teleNP battery shows only modest relationships with its in-person counterpart. Particular caution should be used when interpreting measures showing questionable reliability, though we encourage further investigation of remote vs. in-person testing under more controlled conditions.
In research, and particularly clinical trials, it is important to identify persons at high risk for developing Alzheimer’s Disease (AD), such as those with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). However, not all persons with this diagnosis have a high risk of AD as MCI can be broken down further into amnestic MCI (aMCI), who have a high risk specifically for AD, and non-amnestic MCI (naMCI), who are predominantly at risk for other dementias. People with aMCI largely differ from healthy controls and naMCI on memory tasks as it is the hallmark criteria for an amnestic diagnosis. Given the growing use of the NIH Toolbox Cognition battery in research trials, this project investigated which Toolbox Cognition measures best differentiated aMCI from naMCI and in comparison to persons with normal cognition.
Participants and Methods:
A retrospective data analysis was conducted investigating performance on NIH Toolbox Cognition tasks among 199 participants enrolled in the Michigan Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center. All participants were over age 50 (51-89 years, M=70.64) and had a diagnosis of aMCI (N=74), naMCI (N=24), or Normal Cognition (N=101). Potential demographic differences were investigated using chi-square and ANOVAs. Repeated measure general linear model was used to look at potential group differences in Toolbox Cognition performance, covarying for age which was statistically different in aMCI versus Normal participants. Linear regression was used to determine which cognitive abilities, as measured by the Uniform Data Set-3 (UDS3), might contribute to Toolbox differences noted in naMCI versus aMCI groups.
Results:
As expected, aMCI had lower Toolbox memory scores compared to naMCI (p=0.007) and Normals (p<0.001). Interestingly, naMCI had lower Oral Reading scores than both aMCI (p=0.008) and Normals (p<0.001). There were no other Toolbox performance differences between the MCI groups. 19.4% of the variance in Oral Reading scores was explained by performance on the following UDS3 measures: Benson delayed recall (inverse relationship) and backward digit span and phonemic fluency (positive relationship).
Conclusions:
In this study, Toolbox Picture Sequence Memory and Oral Reading scores differentiated aMCI and naMCI groups. While the difference in memory was expected, it was surprising that the naMCI group performed worse than the aMCI and normal groups on the Toolbox Oral Reading task, a task presumed to reflect Crystalized abilities resistive to cognitive decline. Results suggest that Oral Reading is primarily positively associated with working memory and executive tasks from the UDS3, but negatively associated with visual memory. It is possible that the Oral Reading subtest is sensitive to domains of deficit aside from memory that can best distinguish aMCI from naMCI. A better understanding of the underlying features in the Oral Reading task will assist in better characterizing deficit patterns seen in naMCI, making selection of aMCI participants more effective in clinical trials.
This chapter begins in England in the early nineteenth century, when the printing industry, which had previously been conducted exclusively through manual labor, was rapidly mechanized through the application of steam power. It considers the major events in the industrialization of print such as the development of lithography and machine-made paper; the application of the steam engine to printing; and the worldwide distribution of books aided by steam ships and railways. Reader demonstrates that any scholarly investigation of the literary legacy of steam-driven presses must leave behind narrow disciplinary boundaries: “Literary scholars wishing to assert the importance of machine printing must necessarily place texts in relation not only to other works of literature but also to competing media: journalism, advertising, and other products of the print industry.”
Through adopting a history-of-emotions framework, this article explores romantic love within Black enslaved communities of the antebellum and early postbellum South. Whilst several historians have already explored the emotion of love in enslaved emotional communities, there is a growing understanding by scholars of the history of emotions that emotions, including love, are not always adequately historicized, and have perhaps been taken at face or written value. In some contrast to previous historical scholarship, this article argues that the love, as expressed and experienced within Black enslaved communities, was complex, contentious, and far from monolithic.
Few studies have evaluated in-home teleneuropsychological (teleNP) assessment and none, to our knowledge, has evaluated the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center’s (NACC) Uniform Data Set version 3 tele-adapted test battery (UDS v3.0 t-cog). The current study evaluates the reliability of the in-home UDS v3.0 t-cog with a prior in-person UDS v3.0 evaluation.
Method:
One hundred and eighty-one cognitively unimpaired or cognitively impaired participants from a longitudinal study of memory and aging completed an in-person UDS v3.0 and a subsequent UDS v3.0 t-cog evaluation (∼16 months apart) administered either via video conference (n = 122) or telephone (n = 59).
Results:
We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between each time point for the entire sample. ICCs ranged widely (0.01–0.79) but were generally indicative of “moderate” (i.e., ICCs ranging from 0.5–0.75) to “good” (i.e., ICCs ranging from 0.75–0.90) agreement. Comparable ICCs were evident when looking only at those with stable diagnoses. However, relatively stronger ICCs (Range: 0.35–0.87) were found between similarly timed in-person UDS v3.0 evaluations.
Conclusions:
Our findings suggest that most tests on the UDS v3.0 t-cog battery may serve as a viable alternative to its in-person counterpart, though reliability may be attenuated relative to the traditional in-person format. More tightly controlled studies are needed to better establish the reliability of these measures.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE), underscoring the urgent need for simple, efficient, and inexpensive methods to decontaminate masks and respirators exposed to severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We hypothesized that methylene blue (MB) photochemical treatment, which has various clinical applications, could decontaminate PPE contaminated with coronavirus.
Design:
The 2 arms of the study included (1) PPE inoculation with coronaviruses followed by MB with light (MBL) decontamination treatment and (2) PPE treatment with MBL for 5 cycles of decontamination to determine maintenance of PPE performance.
Methods:
MBL treatment was used to inactivate coronaviruses on 3 N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) and 2 medical mask models. We inoculated FFR and medical mask materials with 3 coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, and we treated them with 10 µM MB and exposed them to 50,000 lux of white light or 12,500 lux of red light for 30 minutes. In parallel, integrity was assessed after 5 cycles of decontamination using multiple US and international test methods, and the process was compared with the FDA-authorized vaporized hydrogen peroxide plus ozone (VHP+O3) decontamination method.
Results:
Overall, MBL robustly and consistently inactivated all 3 coronaviruses with 99.8% to >99.9% virus inactivation across all FFRs and medical masks tested. FFR and medical mask integrity was maintained after 5 cycles of MBL treatment, whereas 1 FFR model failed after 5 cycles of VHP+O3.
Conclusions:
MBL treatment decontaminated respirators and masks by inactivating 3 tested coronaviruses without compromising integrity through 5 cycles of decontamination. MBL decontamination is effective, is low cost, and does not require specialized equipment, making it applicable in low- to high-resource settings.
The study of culture is usually the preserve of social anthropologists, sociologists and cultural theorists who have developed sophisticated theories to describe and explain cultural phenomena. Recently, there has been much interest in an evolutionary approach to culture. In contrast to many earlier theories these evolutionary theories attempt to provide ultimate rather than proximate explanations of culture. One of the biggest ultimate questions about culture is why do we have culture at all? From this perspective, the phenomenon of culture is not something that ‘just happened’; there is good evidence that human culture needs a particular sort of brain in order to sustain it.