Have humans evolved as violent and warlike? Studies of peaceful societies, historical trends of warfare and violence, and cooperation say otherwise. Evolution is not destiny; human choices are important interventions in the process. A science of intentional change, using alternative learning techniques that support human interactions based on nonviolence and peaceful coexistence, might help to evolve a culture of peace.

Three challenges to the sufficiency of the associative account for explaining the development of mirror mechanisms are discussed: Genetic predispositions interact with associative learning, infants show predispositions to imitate human as opposed to nonhuman actions, and early and later learning involve different mechanisms. Legitimate objections to an extreme nativist account are raised, but the proposed solution is equally problematic.

The inherence heuristic is a cognitive process that supplies quick and effortless explanations for a wide variety of observations. Due in part to biases in memory retrieval, this heuristic tends to overproduce explanations that appeal to the inherent features of the entities in the observations being explained (hence the heuristic's name). In this response, we use the commentators' input to clarify, refine, and expand the inherence heuristic model. The end result is a piece that complements the target article, amplifying its theoretical contribution.

Two of the roles assigned to the basal ganglia in spoken language parallel very well their contribution to motor behaviour: (1) their role in sequence processing, resulting in syntax deficits, and (2) their role in movement “vigor,” leading to “hypokinetic dysarthria” or “hypophonia.” This is an additional example of how the motor system has served the emergence of high-level cognitive functions, such as language.

Disputes between those holding differing political views are ubiquitous and deep-seated, and they often follow common, recognizable lines. The supporters of tradition and stability, sometimes referred to as conservatives, do battle with the supporters of innovation and reform, sometimes referred to as liberals. Understanding the correlates of those distinct political orientations is probably a prerequisite for managing political disputes, which are a source of social conflict that can lead to frustration and even bloodshed. A rapidly growing body of empirical evidence documents a multitude of ways in which liberals and conservatives differ from each other in purviews of life with little direct connection to politics, from tastes in art to desire for closure and from disgust sensitivity to the tendency to pursue new information, but the central theme of the differences is a matter of debate. In this article, we argue that one organizing element of the many differences between liberals and conservatives is the nature of their physiological and psychological responses to features of the environment that are negative. Compared with liberals, conservatives tend to register greater physiological responses to such stimuli and also to devote more psychological resources to them. Operating from this point of departure, we suggest approaches for refining understanding of the broad relationship between political views and response to the negative. We conclude with a discussion of normative implications, stressing that identifying differences across ideological groups is not tantamount to declaring one ideology superior to another.

The behavioral sciences have flourished by studying how traditional and/or rational behavior has been governed throughout most of human history by relatively well-informed individual and social learning. In the online age, however, social phenomena can occur with unprecedented scale and unpredictability, and individuals have access to social connections never before possible. Similarly, behavioral scientists now have access to “big data” sets – those from Twitter and Facebook, for example – that did not exist a few years ago. Studies of human dynamics based on these data sets are novel and exciting but, if not placed in context, can foster the misconception that mass-scale online behavior is all we need to understand, for example, how humans make decisions. To overcome that misconception, we draw on the field of discrete-choice theory to create a multiscale comparative “map” that, like a principal-components representation, captures the essence of decision making along two axes: (1) an east–west dimension that represents the degree to which an agent makes a decision independently versus one that is socially influenced, and (2) a north–south dimension that represents the degree to which there is transparency in the payoffs and risks associated with the decisions agents make. We divide the map into quadrants, each of which features a signature behavioral pattern. When taken together, the map and its signatures provide an easily understood empirical framework for evaluating how modern collective behavior may be changing in the digital age, including whether behavior is becoming more individualistic, as people seek out exactly what they want, or more social, as people become more inextricably linked, even “herdlike,” in their decision making. We believe the map will lead to many new testable hypotheses concerning human behavior as well as to similar applications throughout the social sciences.

Existing computational models of the mirror system demonstrate the additional circuitry needed for mirror neurons to display the range of properties that they exhibit. Such models emphasize the need for existing connectivity to form visuomotor associations, processing to reduce the space of possible inputs, and demonstrate the role neurons with mirror properties might play in monitoring one's own actions.

We demonstrate by means of a simulation that the conceptual map presented by Bentley et al. is incomplete without taking into account people's decision processes. Within the same environment, two decision processes can generate strikingly different collective behavior; in two environments that fundamentally differ in transparency, a single process gives rise to virtually identical behavior.

Negativity bias may underlie the development of political ideologies, but liberals and conservatives are likely to respond to threats similarly. We review evidence from research on intolerance, motivated reasoning, and basic psychological threats that suggest liberals and conservatives are more similar than different when confronting threatening groups, situations, and information.

The apparent success of the Sudbury Valley School, coupled with its lack of impact on the larger culture, is used here to illustrate general constraints on managed change at the large-population level. Government regulations preventing innovation, the difficulty of bucking social norms, and the inadequacy of current indices of success operate against beneficial educational change in the larger culture.

In this response to commentaries, we revisit the two main arguments of our target article. Based on data drawn from a variety of research areas – vocal behavior in nonhuman primates, speech physiology and pathology, neurobiology of basal ganglia functions, motor skill learning, paleoanthropological concepts – the target article, first, suggests a two-stage model of the evolution of the crucial motor prerequisites of spoken language within the hominin lineage: (1) monosynaptic refinement of the projections of motor cortex to brainstem nuclei steering laryngeal muscles, and (2) subsequent “vocal-laryngeal elaboration” of cortico-basal ganglia circuits, driven by human-specific FOXP2 mutations. Second, as concerns the ontogenetic development of verbal communication, age-dependent interactions between the basal ganglia and their cortical targets are assumed to contribute to the time course of the acquisition of articulate speech. Whereas such a phylogenetic reorganization of cortico-striatal circuits must be considered a necessary prerequisite for ontogenetic speech acquisition, the 30 commentaries – addressing the whole range of data sources referred to – point at several further aspects of acoustic communication which have to be added to or integrated with the presented model. For example, the relationships between vocal tract movement sequencing – the focus of the target article – and rhythmical structures of movement organization, the connections between speech motor control and the central-auditory and central-visual systems, the impact of social factors upon the development of vocal behavior (in nonhuman primates and in our species), and the interactions of ontogenetic speech acquisition – based upon FOXP2-driven structural changes at the level of the basal ganglia – with preceding subvocal stages of acoustic communication as well as higher-order (cognitive) dimensions of phonological development. Most importantly, thus, several promising future research directions unfold from these contributions – accessible to clinical studies and functional imaging in our species as well as experimental investigations in nonhuman primates.

Bentley et al.’s claim that their “map … captures the essence of decision making” (target article, Abstract) is deconstructed and shown to originate in a serious misunderstanding of the role of principal components and statistical graphics in the generation of pattern claims and hypotheses from profile data. Three alternative maps are offered, each with its radiation of further investigations.

In this commentary, we propose an extension of the associative approach of mirror neurons, namely, ideomotor theory. Ideomotor theory assumes that actions are controlled by anticipatory representations of their sensory consequences. As we outline below, this extension is necessary to clarify a number of empirical observations that are difficult to explain from a purely associative perspective.

This commentary advances the hypothesis that differences between liberal and conservative orientations noted in the target article are emotional in nature and caused by differences in attachment security: Conservatives are more vigilant to negative features of the environment because of a general sense of insecurity, whereas liberals are relatively more secure.

Taking an evolutionary perspective on human nature is highly commendable when the purpose is to improve society. Changing the course of human evolution is more questionable – in the biological sense of the term. The “science of intentional change” should preferably have a terminology that distinguishes between genetic changes and cultural transformation, and it needs a direction.

Bentley et al.’s analysis of how human decision-making has changed in the online age does not mention emotion. Although the suggested dimensions involving social influence and transparency are interesting and suggestive, the engines behind the changes wrought by online media are arguably largely emotional, and implications of the communication of specific emotions via online media need to be better understood.

Positive and negative reinforcers guide our behaviors as we interact with others in our social environment. Here, we present evidence that highlights a central role for reward in the general functioning of the mirror neuron system (MNS). We also discuss the relevance of reward-related modulation on other previous findings revealing certain properties of the MNS, and on social context and psychopathology.