//Should be placed in the header of every page. This won't fire any events

Did humanity evolve to have psychopaths?

Psychopaths are manipulative, violent, impulsive, and lack empathy — but research suggests that psychopathy may be an evolutionary strategy rather than a disorder.

  • It's tempting to think of psychopathy as a kind of aberrant mental condition, but several studies suggest that it may be an evolutionary strategy.
  • A study compared the genetic profiles of psychopaths with individuals who were more likely to have children younger and more frequently and found significant overlap.
  • This suggests that the qualities that bring about psychopathy are also qualities that encourage more frequent reproduction, making psychopathy an advantageous strategy.

From an evolutionary perspective, it seems odd that we would have psychopaths among our numbers at all. A great deal of what's made humanity a successful species is our social cohesiveness, our empathy toward one another, and our understanding of right and wrong. What benefit could there be for individuals to simply lack these socially binding qualities and to feel a tendency toward violence to boot? The evolutionary role of psychopaths becomes even stranger when you consider the fact that psychopaths are at higher risk for becoming disabled or dying early owing to their impulsivity and reckless behavior.

It's tempting to say that psychopathy is simply the result of a short circuit in the complicated wiring that makes up our brains. However, it may be the case that psychopaths are simply employing a different reproductive strategy than the rest of us. At least, that's what Jorim Tielbeek and colleagues argue.

Looking at the genome

While psychopathy is believed to have some environmental causes, much of what brings it about is genetic. We know that there are certain mutations that encourage psychopathic personalities. Tielbeek and colleagues were curious as to whether these mutations also conferred some other kind of benefit. So, they looked at two large databases containing genotypic data on over 31,000 individuals. A prior study had also uncovered the genetic profiles of individuals who were more likely to have children younger and to have more children overall. By looking at the overlap of these two genetic profiles, the research team was able to see whether there was any correlation between the two sets.

They found that there was, indeed, a fairly significant overlap. The genes associated with having children earlier and more often are also associated with the genes that give psychopaths the characteristics that make them psychopathic, like a lack of empathy.

Why psychopathy exists

Photo by Jesús Rocha on Unsplash

It seems counterintuitive, but this finding fits well with what we understand about psychopaths. Previous research has found that psychopaths are often superficially charming, which enables them to attract others in the short term. In the long term, though, this façade crumbles over time. Psychopaths are also prone to greater disinhibition than others, meaning they have problems with impulse control and tend to seek immediate gratification. Combined, these traits would make psychopaths sexually promiscuous, and their disregard for social norms makes them more prone to poaching others' mates or sexual assault, a theory that has been supported by a number of other studies.

But if psychopathy can be a way to have more offspring, why aren't there more psychopaths? After all, Tielbeek and his colleagues' study showed that psychopaths are more likely to have more children, and we know that there is a significant genetic component in psychopathy. Wouldn't the psychopathic gene out-reproduce the non-psychopathic gene?

Why we aren't all psychopaths

One theory is that there's a kind of balancing act going on in the human genome. Highly psychopathic individuals make up about 1 percent of the human population. According to this theory, this number is so low because psychopaths are a kind of social parasite that can only thrive in groups predominantly made up of people who can be taken advantage of; that is, environments made up of moral, empathetic, socially-minded individuals. In groups like these, its easier to take advantage of others' trust to gain resources, like access to sexual partners. If there were too many psychopaths, then this system wouldn't work, and a given social group might become stricter about enforcing group norms. It should be noted that this a difficult theory to test directly.

There's also the idea that the "fast" lifestyles of psychopathic individuals may encourage them to reproduce more frequently, but it doesn't encourage them to invest any of themselves in their offspring's success. Individuals with "slow" lifestyles have fewer children but tend to stick around to make sure their children develop into healthy, competent, and successful adults. The psychopath wouldn't care about that — they demand instant gratification and aren't particularly attracted to the promise of future rewards. In this way, fewer offspring with the psychopathic genome would go on to be in a position to reproduce.

Evolution doesn't have a perspective or an opinion on things. It's a neutral process that selects what works. What these studies show is that, at least when it comes to human evolution, psychopathy is more of a feature than a bug.

3D printing might save your life one day. It's transforming medicine and health care.

What can 3D printing do for medicine? The "sky is the limit," says Northwell Health researcher Dr. Todd Goldstein.

Northwell Health
Sponsored by Northwell Health
  • Medical professionals are currently using 3D printers to create prosthetics and patient-specific organ models that doctors can use to prepare for surgery.
  • Eventually, scientists hope to print patient-specific organs that can be transplanted safely into the human body.
  • Northwell Health, New York State's largest health care provider, is pioneering 3D printing in medicine in three key ways.
Keep reading Show less

Why it’s hard to tell when high-class people are incompetent

A recent study gives new meaning to the saying "fake it 'til you make it."

Pixabay
Surprising Science
  • The study involves four experiments that measured individuals' socioeconomic status, overconfidence and actual performance.
  • Results consistently showed that high-class people tend to overestimate their abilities.
  • However, this overconfidence was misinterpreted as genuine competence in one study, suggesting overestimating your abilities can have social advantages.
Keep reading Show less

Maps show how CNN lost America to Fox News

Is this proof of a dramatic shift?

Strange Maps
  • Map details dramatic shift from CNN to Fox News over 10-year period
  • Does it show the triumph of "fake news" — or, rather, its defeat?
  • A closer look at the map's legend allows for more complex analyses

Dramatic and misleading

Image: Reddit / SICResearch

The situation today: CNN pushed back to the edges of the country.

Over the course of no more than a decade, America has radically switched favorites when it comes to cable news networks. As this sequence of maps showing TMAs (Television Market Areas) suggests, CNN is out, Fox News is in.

The maps are certainly dramatic, but also a bit misleading. They nevertheless provide some insight into the state of journalism and the public's attitudes toward the press in the US.

Let's zoom in:

  • It's 2008, on the eve of the Obama Era. CNN (blue) dominates the cable news landscape across America. Fox News (red) is an upstart (°1996) with a few regional bastions in the South.
  • By 2010, Fox News has broken out of its southern heartland, colonizing markets in the Midwest and the Northwest — and even northern Maine and southern Alaska.
  • Two years later, Fox News has lost those two outliers, but has filled up in the middle: it now boasts two large, contiguous blocks in the southeast and northwest, almost touching.
  • In 2014, Fox News seems past its prime. The northwestern block has shrunk, the southeastern one has fragmented.
  • Energised by Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, Fox News is back with a vengeance. Not only have Maine and Alaska gone from entirely blue to entirely red, so has most of the rest of the U.S. Fox News has plugged the Nebraska Gap: it's no longer possible to walk from coast to coast across CNN territory.
  • By 2018, the fortunes from a decade earlier have almost reversed. Fox News rules the roost. CNN clings on to the Pacific Coast, New Mexico, Minnesota and parts of the Northeast — plus a smattering of metropolitan areas in the South and Midwest.

"Frightening map"

Image source: Reddit / SICResearch

This sequence of maps, showing America turning from blue to red, elicited strong reactions on the Reddit forum where it was published last week. For some, the takeover by Fox News illustrates the demise of all that's good and fair about news journalism. Among the comments?

  • "The end is near."
  • "The idiocracy grows."
  • "(It's) like a spreading disease."
  • "One of the more frightening maps I've seen."
For others, the maps are less about the rise of Fox News, and more about CNN's self-inflicted downward spiral:
  • "LOL that's what happens when you're fake news!"
  • "CNN went down the toilet on quality."
  • "A Minecraft YouTuber could beat CNN's numbers."
  • "CNN has become more like a high-school production of a news show."

Not a few find fault with both channels, even if not always to the same degree:

  • "That anybody considers either of those networks good news sources is troubling."
  • "Both leave you understanding less rather than more."
  • "This is what happens when you spout bullsh-- for two years straight. People find an alternative — even if it's just different bullsh--."
  • "CNN is sh-- but it's nowhere close to the outright bullsh-- and baseless propaganda Fox News spews."

"Old people learning to Google"

Image: Google Trends

CNN vs. Fox News search terms (200!-2018)

But what do the maps actually show? Created by SICResearch, they do show a huge evolution, but not of both cable news networks' audience size (i.e. Nielsen ratings). The dramatic shift is one in Google search trends. In other words, it shows how often people type in "CNN" or "Fox News" when surfing the web. And that does not necessarily reflect the relative popularity of both networks. As some commenters suggest:

  • "I can't remember the last time that I've searched for a news channel on Google. Is it really that difficult for people to type 'cnn.com'?"
  • "More than anything else, these maps show smart phone proliferation (among older people) more than anything else."
  • "This is a map of how old people and rural areas have learned to use Google in the last decade."
  • "This is basically a map of people who don't understand how the internet works, and it's no surprise that it leans conservative."

A visual image as strong as this map sequence looks designed to elicit a vehement response — and its lack of context offers viewers little new information to challenge their preconceptions. Like the news itself, cartography pretends to be objective, but always has an agenda of its own, even if just by the selection of its topics.

The trick is not to despair of maps (or news) but to get a good sense of the parameters that are in play. And, as is often the case (with both maps and news), what's left out is at least as significant as what's actually shown.

One important point: while Fox News is the sole major purveyor of news and opinion with a conservative/right-wing slant, CNN has more competition in the center/left part of the spectrum, notably from MSNBC.

Another: the average age of cable news viewers — whether they watch CNN or Fox News — is in the mid-60s. As a result of a shift in generational habits, TV viewing is down across the board. Younger people are more comfortable with a "cafeteria" approach to their news menu, selecting alternative and online sources for their information.

It should also be noted, however, that Fox News, according to Harvard's Nieman Lab, dominates Facebook when it comes to engagement among news outlets.

CNN, Fox and MSNBC

Image: Google Trends

CNN vs. Fox (without the 'News'; may include searches for actual foxes). See MSNBC (in yellow) for comparison

For the record, here are the Nielsen ratings for average daily viewer total for the three main cable news networks, for 2018 (compared to 2017):

  • Fox News: 1,425,000 (-5%)
  • MSNBC: 994,000 (+12%)
  • CNN: 706,000 (-9%)

And according to this recent overview, the top 50 of the most popular websites in the U.S. includes cnn.com in 28th place, and foxnews.com in... 27th place.

The top 5, in descending order, consists of google.com, youtube.com, facebook.com, amazon.com and yahoo.com — the latter being the highest-placed website in the News and Media category.
Keep reading Show less

Mother bonobos, too, pressure their sons to have grandchildren

If you thought your mother was pushy in her pursuit of grandchildren, wait until you learn about bonobo mothers.

Pixabay
Surprising Science
  • Mother bonobos have been observed to help their sons find and copulate with mates.
  • The mothers accomplish this by leading sons to mates, interfering with other males trying to copulate with females, and helping sons rise in the social hierarchy of the group.
  • Why do mother bonobos do this? The "grandmother hypothesis" might hold part of the answer.
Keep reading Show less
//This will actually fire event. Should be called after consent was verifed