No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Cleansing and separation procedures reflect resource concerns
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 February 2021
Abstract
We propose that procedures of separation have two functions, namely first, to establish the integrity of individual parts, and second, to make previously joint entities discreet and therefore countable. This allows taking stock of available resources, including evaluating the use of individual objects, a process that is especially adaptive under conditions of threat of contagious disease and resource scarcity.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Obsessive compulsive and related disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.dsm05.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and danger: An analysis of the concept of pollution and taboo. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Duschinsky, R., Schnall, S., & Weiss, D. (Eds.). (2017). Purity and danger now: New perspectives. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315529738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, R. (2000). Nonverbal numerical cognition: From reals to integers. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mancebo, M. C., Eisen, J. L., Grant, J. E., & Rasmussen, S. A. (2005). Obsessive compulsive personality disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder: Clinical characteristics, diagnostic difficulties, and treatment. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry, 17, 197–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moes, G. S., Lall, R., & Johnson, W. B. (1996). Personality characteristics of successful navy submarine personnel. Military Medicine, 161, 239–242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinto, A., Steinglass, J. E., Greene, A. L., Weber, E. U., & Simpson, H. B. (2014). Capacity to delay reward differentiates obsessive-compulsive disorder and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 75(8), 653–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2013.09.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schnall, S. (2014). Are there basic metaphors?. In Landau, M. J., Robinson, M. D. & Meier, B. P. (Eds.), The power of metaphor: Examining its influence on social life (pp. 225–247). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnall, S. (2017). Disgust as embodied loss aversion. European Review of Social Psychology, 28(1), 50–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2016.1259844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skodol, A. E., Oldham, J. M., Bender, D. S., Dyck, I. R., Stout, R. L., Morey, L. C., & McGlashan, T. H. (2005). Dimensional representations of DSM-IV personality disorders: Relationships to functional impairment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 1919–1925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullrich, S., Farrington, D. P., & Coid, J. W. (2007). Dimensions of DSM-IV personality disorders and life-success. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21(6), 657–663. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2007.21.6.657.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wellen, D., Samuels, J., Bienvenu, J., Grados, M., Cullen, B., Riddle, M., Liang, K.-Y., & Nestadt, G. (2007). Utility of the Leyton obsessional inventory to distinguish OCD and OCPD. Depression and Anxiety, 24, 301–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wynn, K. (1998). Psychological foundations of number: Numerical competence in human infant. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 296–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
Grounded procedures: A proximate mechanism for the psychology of cleansing and other physical actions
Related commentaries (27)
A not-so proximate account of cleansing behavior
Bio-culturally grounded: why separation and connection may not be the same around the world
Body ownership as a proxy for individual and social separation and connection
Cleansing and separating: From modern agriculture and genocide to post-separation era
Cleansing and separation procedures reflect resource concerns
Considerations of the proximate mechanisms and ultimate functions of disgust will improve our understanding of cleansing effects
Cultural mindsets shape what grounded procedures mean: Cleansing can separate or connect and separating can feel good or not so good
Culture, ecology, and grounded procedures
Developmental antecedents of cleansing effects: Evidence against domain-generality
From washing hands to washing consciences and polishing reputations
Going beyond elementary mechanisms: the strategic interplay between grounded procedures
Grounded procedures of connection are not created equal
Grounded procedures of separation in clinical psychology: what's to be expected?
Grounded separation: can the sensorimotor be grounded in the symbolic?
Grounding together: Shared reality and cleansing practices
Incomplete grounding: the theory of symbolic separation is contradicted by pervasive stability in attitudes and behavior
It's a matter of (executive) load: Separation as a load-dependent resetting procedure
Leveraging individual differences to understand grounded procedures
Proper understanding of grounded procedures of separation needs a dual inheritance approach
Psychology of cleansing through the prism of intersecting object histories
Separation/connection procedures: From cleansing behavior to numerical cognition
Specifying separation: avoidance, abstraction, openness to new experiences
The impact of grounded procedures can vary as a function of perceived thought validity, meaning, and timing
The lack of robust evidence for cleansing effects
The role of goal-generalization processes in the effects of grounded procedures
The role of meta-analysis and preregistration in assessing the evidence for cleansing effects
The role of mortality concerns in separation and connection effects: comment on Lee and Schwarz
Author response
Grounded procedures in mind and society