Cited by 234Child and Animal Learning DevelopmentPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Brain and cognitive evolution: Forms of modularity and functions of mind.

Geary, David C., Huffman, Kelly J.·2002·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

Genetic and neurobiological research is reviewed as related to controversy over the extent to which neocortical organization and associated cognitive functions are genetically constrained or emerge through patterns of developmental experience. An evolutionary framework that accommodates genetic constraint and experiential modification of brain organization and cognitive function is then proposed. The authors argue that 4 forms of modularity and 3 forms of neural and cognitive plasticity define the relation between genetic constraint and the influence of developmental experience. For humans, the result is the ontogenetic emergence of functional modules in the domains of folk psychology, folk biology, and folk physics. The authors present a taxonomy of these modules and review associated research relating to brain and cognitive plasticity in these domains.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.667

Cites

328 of 328 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The effect of social and ecological complexity may be limited to influencing more specialized, and potentially domain-specific, forms of cognition.

    “Our findings suggest that the effect of social and ecological complexity may be limited to influencing more specialized, and potentially domain-specific forms of cognition (188-196).”

    From The evolution of self-control. (2014) · cites this paper as [189]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Geary, D. C., & Huffman, K. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Missouri (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
2002
Volume
128
Issue
5
Pages
667-698
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W2052507434
Cited by
234
References
328
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
55.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
brain evolution, cognitive evolution, modularity of mind, genetic constraints, neuroplasticity, cognitive plasticity, folk psychology, folk biology, folk physics, ontogeny, developmental experiences
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Cognition, Biological Evolution, Humans, Functional Laterality, Neuronal Plasticity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review