Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modularity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology

Part of the book series: Evolutionary Psychology ((EVOLPSYCH))

Abstract

The modularity of the mind has been a contentious topic in psychology, stemming from the classical definition of modules as innate, automatic, unconscious cognitive reflexes. A biological view of modularity, on the other hand, treats modules as biological traits that can vary in many ways, including along dimensions of separability, plasticity, and interactivity. Here, I compare and contrast these views to show how a biologically based view of modularity is indispensable for thinking about the architecture of the brain, an assembly of many interacting mechanisms and processes with distinct functions and evolutionary histories. I describe how a hierarchical view of brain modules as evolved via descent with modification from common ancestral structures leads to a rethinking of the classical view of modules as entirely autonomous and independently shaped traits, and discuss implications of the biological modularity perspective for social psychology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allman, J. M. (2000). Evolving brains. New York: Scientific American Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (2000). Design rules: Vol. 1. The power of modularity. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C. (2005). Enzymatic computation and cognitive modularity. Mind & Language, 20, 259–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C. (2006). Modularity and design reincarnation. In P. Carruthers, S. Laurence, & S. Stich (Eds.), The innate mind: Vol. 2. Culture and cognition (pp. 199–217). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C. (2012). A hierarchical model of the evolution of human brain specializations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(Suppl. 1), 10733–10740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C. (2015). The shape of thought: How mental adaptations evolve. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113, 628–647.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C., Frederick, D. A., Haselton, M. G., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Can manipulations of cognitive load be used to test evolutionary hypotheses? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 513–518.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buller, D. J., & Hardcastle, V. G. (2000). Evolutionary psychology, meet developmental neurobiology: Against promiscuous modularity. Brain and Mind, 1, 307–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullmore, E., & Sporns, O. (2009). Complex brain networks: Graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10, 186–198.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Callebaut, W., & Rasskin-Gutman, D. (Eds.). (2005). Modularity: Understanding the development and evolution of natural complex systems. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, S. B. (2008). Evo-devo and an expanding evolutionary synthesis: A genetic theory of morphological evolution. Cell, 134, 25–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carruthers, P. (2006). The architecture of the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • DeSteno, D., Bartlett, M. Y., Braverman, J., & Salovey, P. (2002). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolutionary mechanism or artifact of measurement? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1103–1116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. S. B. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A. (1987). Modules, frames, fridgeons, sleeping dogs, and the music of the spheres. In J. L. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language understanding (pp. 26–36). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. (1998). The trouble with psychological Darwinism. London Review of Books, 20, 11–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. (2000). The mind doesn’t work that way: The scope and limits of computational psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankenhuis, W. E., & Ploeger, A. (2007). Evolutionary psychology versus Fodor: Arguments for and against the massive modularity hypothesis. Philosophical Psychology, 20, 687–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D. (2009). Pathways to language: Fiber tracts in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 175–181.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frith, C. D., & Frith, U. (2007). Social cognition in humans. Current Biology, 17(16), R724–R732.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. K. (2003). Descent with modification: The unity underlying homology and homoplasy as seen through an analysis of development and evolution. Biological Reviews, 78, 409–433.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, N. D. (2003). Early central nervous system evolution: An era of skin brains? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 617–627.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaas, J. H. (1984). Duplication of brain parts in evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 342–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khaitovich, P., Muetzel, B., She, X., Lachmann, M., Hellmann, I., Dietzsch, J., Steigele, S., Do, H. H., Weiss, G., Enard, W., Heissig, F., Arendt, T., Nieselt-Struwe, K., Eichler, E. E., & Pääbo, S. (2004). Regional patterns of gene expression in human and chimpanzee brains. Genome Research, 14, 1462–1473.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krubitzer, L., & Huffman, K. J. (2000). Arealization of the neocortex in mammals: Genetic and epigenetic contributions to the phenotype. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 55, 322–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kurzban, R. (2010). Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite: Evolution and the modular mind. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, J., & Feldman, M. W. (2000). Niche construction, biological evolution, and cultural change. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 131–146.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Machery, E. (2008). Massive modularity and the flexibility of human cognition. Mind & Language, 23, 263–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, C. (2004). Selector genes and the genetic control of developmental modules. In G. Schlosser & G. P. Wagner (Eds.), Modularity in development and evolution (pp. 17–33). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panksepp, J., & Panksepp, J. B. (2000). The seven sins of evolutionary psychology. Evolution and Cognition, 6, 108–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raff, R. A. (1996). The shape of life: Genes, development, and the evolution of animal form. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravasz, E., Somera, A. L., Mongru, D. A., Oltvai, Z. N., & Barabási, A. L. (2002). Hierarchical organization of modularity in metabolic networks. Science, 297(5586), 1551–1555.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rilling, J. K., Glasser, M. F., Preuss, T. M., Ma, X., Zhao, T., Hu, X., & Behrens, T. E. J. (2008). The evolution of the arcuate fasciculus revealed with comparative DTI. Nature Neuroscience, 11, 426–428.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, R. (1998). Evolutionary psychology and the massive modularity hypothesis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49, 575–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, G., & Wagner, G. P. (Eds.). (2004). Modularity in development and evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenemann, P. T., Sheehan, M. J., & Glotzer, L. D. (2005). Prefrontal white matter volume is disproportionately larger in humans than in other primates. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 242–252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shallice, T. (1988). From neuropsychology to mental structure. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D. (1994). The modularity of thought and the epidemiology of representations. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 39–67). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D. (2001). In defense of massive modularity. In E. Dupoux (Ed.), Language, brain, and cognitive development: Essays in honor of Jacques Mehler (pp. 47–57). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E. (2004). The robot’s rebellion: Finding meaning in the age of Darwin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, R. D. K. (2005). Hierarchical integration of modular structures in the evolution of animal skeletons. In W. Callebaut & D. Rasskin-Gutman (Eds.), Modularity: Understanding the development and evolution of natural complex systems (pp. 239–258). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uttal, W. R. (2001). The new phrenology: The limits of localizing cognitive processes in the brain. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G. P., & Altenberg, L. (1996). Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution, 50, 967–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G. P., Mezey, J., & Calabretta, R. (2005). Natural selection and the origin of modules. In W. Callebaut & D. Rasskin-Gutman (Eds.), Modularity: Understanding the development and evolution of natural complex systems (pp. 33–50). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anthropology, University of California Los Angeles, 341 Haines Hall, Box 951553, 90095-1553, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    H. Clark Barrett Ph.D.

Authors
  1. H. Clark Barrett Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Clark Barrett Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA

    Virgil Zeigler-Hill

  2. Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA

    Lisa L. M. Welling

  3. Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA

    Todd K. Shackelford

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Barrett, H. (2015). Modularity. In: Zeigler-Hill, V., Welling, L., Shackelford, T. (eds) Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology. Evolutionary Psychology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12697-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation