The mi’raj manuscript
An illustrated manuscript depicting, in a series of miniatures, the successive stages of the mi’raj , the miraculous ascent of the Prophet Mohammed through the seven
To better understand how individuals, communities, and societies are navigating our rapidly changing world, we need to bring all our scientific tools for studying culture and evolution to the same table. We must unite in our scholarly efforts to explain the most important causes and consequences of cultural evolution, and we must leverage this foundational knowledge to create effective policies for enhancing social resilience and well-being in an ever-changing cultural landscape. In short, we need a more integrated approach to studying the intersections of culture and evolution.
Our launching of the new journal Culture and Evolution addresses this critical need. We intend to publish manuscripts from across the cultural and evolutionary sciences, with a particular emphasis on theoretical or empirical papers that advance our understanding of culture and its connections with biological evolution. Many scholarly disciplines must take part in this endeavour. The journal will seek papers from the fields of cross-cultural psychology, cultural evolution, cultural phylogenetics, dual-inheritance theory, evolutionary anthropology, evolutionary medicine, evolutionary psychology, evolutionary sociology, human behavioural ecology, human ethology, and international public health.
Although limited scholarly overlap exists across these disciplines, there is a trend for scholars to silo within one of these approaches. Each of these disciplines has its own intellectual history, its own favoured theories and methodologies, and its own journals and professional organisations. Because of this, some scholars fail to engage with the best theories and investigative tools that would allow them to properly answer the questions they should be asking. This new journal, Culture and Evolution, intends to change that by creating a venue in which cultural and evolutionary scholars across all disciplines help to inform and inspire one another. Our hope is that armed with an increasingly interdisciplinary framework, contributors and readers of this journal will reconcile historically disparate approaches and bring profound levels of consilience to the cultural and evolutionary sciences.
This paper is a commentary to the article entitled: “Are we overpathologizing everyday life? A tenable blueprint for behavioral addiction research”, by Billieux, Schimmenti, Khazaal, Maurage and Heeren (2015).
Methods and Aims
In this manuscript, we commented on two aspects developed by the authors. Billieux et al. (2015) propose that the recent development of propositions of behavioral addiction is driven by an unwise application of an addiction model to excessive behaviors and rests on a confirmatory research strategy that does not question the psychological processes underlying the development of the conduct. They also show that applying a process driven strategy leads to a more appropriate description of the reality of the behavior and conduct, in particular by describing a variety of motivations for the excessive behavior, which is central to understanding the nature of the conduct. We believe that this new approach, which is fruitful to the emerging domain of behavioral addictions, could also apply to the domain of addictions in general. The latter is characterized by the application of a generic biological model, largely influenced by animal models, focusing on neurophysiological determinants of addiction. This approach may have decreased the attention paid to dimensions of addictions that are more specifically human. We will firstly briefly argue on the limitation of this neurophysiological addiction model for the field of excessive behavioral conducts. Secondly, we will argue for an approach centered on the differentiation of motivations and on the adaptive dimension of the behavior when it first developed and on the evocation of a transition where the conduct became independent of its original function.
The emerging domain of behavioral addictions, where no animal model has been developed so far, may bring a new reflection that may apply to the domain of addictions in general, with a specific attention to human questions.
Authors:Dillon T. Browne, Shealyn S. May, Laura Colucci, and Hans-Jurgen Rumpf
, manuscript preparation and editing; SM, manuscript preparation and editing; LC, manuscript preparation and editing; HJR, manuscript preparation and editing. Conflicts of interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. References American Academy of
Authors:André Sevenius Nilsen, Bjørn Erik Juel, Nadine Farnes, Luis Romundstad, and Johan Frederik Storm
to participate in the study. Author contributions ASN: conceived of study, data acquisition, performed experiment, analysis, interpretation, and wrote the manuscript. BEJ: data acquisition, performed experiment, interpretation, revised manuscript. NF
KG: contributed study concept and design, collected, analyzed and interpreted data, and performed initial drafting of the manuscript. MP: obtained funding and aided in analysis and interpretation of data, manuscript review
Authors:Ricardo B. Viana, Rodrigo L. Vancini, Wellington F. Silva, Naiane S. Morais, Vinnycius N. de Oliveira, Marília S. Andrade, and Claudio A. B. de Lira
effects on health imposed by social isolation and lockdown, such as a decrease in physical activity levels and an increase in sedentary behavior. In summary, while we applaud the manuscript by King, Delfabbro, Billieux, and Potenza (2020) , it is also
Authors:Wai Yen Tang, Felix Reer, and Thorsten Quandt
, collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, writing the manuscript, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. Authors contributions FR, TQ and WYT planned the design of the survey. WYT wrote the manuscript and conducted the statistical
Authors:Tania Moretta, Shubao Chen, and Marc N. Potenza
relate to possible parallel forms of associative learning that may underlie Internet-related addictive behaviors. Authors' contribution TM conducted literature searches, conceptualized the draft, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. SC edited the