Abstract
According to Kanazawa (Psychol Rev 111:512–523, 2004), general intelligence, which he considers as a synonym of abstract thinking, evolved specifically to allow our ancestors to deal with evolutionary novel problems while conferring no advantage in solving evolutionary familiar ones. We present a study whereby the results contradict Kanazawa’s hypothesis by demonstrating that performance on an evolutionary novel problem (an abstract reasoning task) predicts performance on an evolutionary familiar problem (a social reasoning task).
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Almor A, Sloman S (1996) Is deontic reasoning special? Psychol Rev 103:347–380
Bhatt M, Camerer CF (2005) Self-referential thinking and equilibrium as states of mind in games: fMRI evidence. Games Econ Behav 52:424–459
Borsboom D, Dolan CV (2006) Why g is not an adaptation: a comment on Kanazawa (2004). Psychol Rev 113:433–437
Carlisle E, Shafir E (2005) Questioning the cheater-detection hypothesis: new studies with the selection task. Think Reasoning 11:97–122
Cosmides L (1989) The logic of social exchange: has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition 31:187–276
Cosmides L, Tooby J (1996) Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Cognition 58:1–73
Cosmides L, Tooby J (2002) Unraveling the enigma of human intelligence. In: Sternberg R, Kaufman J (eds) The evolution of intelligence. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 145–198
Fiddick L, Cosmides L, Tooby J (2000) No interpretation without representation: the role of domain-specific representations in the Wason selection task. Cognition 77:1–79
Fodor JA (1983) Modularity of mind: an essay on faculty psychology. MIT Press, Cambridge Mass
Girotto V, Blaye A, Farioli F (1989) A reason to reason: pragmatic basis of children’s search for counterexamples. Eur Bull Cogn Psychol 9:297–321
Girotto V, Kemmelmeier M, Sperber D, van der Henst JB (2001) Inept reasoners or pragmatic virtuosos? Relevance and the deontic selection task. Cognition 81:69–76
Hilton D, Kemmelmeier M, Bonnefon JF (2005) Putting ifs to work: goal-based relevance in conditional directives. J Exp Psychol Gen 134:388–405
Kanazawa S (2004) General intelligence as a domain-specific adaptation. Psychol Rev 111:512–523
Johnson-Laird PN (2006) How we reason. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Johnson-Laird PN, Legrenzi P, Girotto V, Sonino M (2000) Illusions in reasoning about consistency. Science 288:531–532
Lickliter R, Honeycutt H (2003) Developmental dynamics: toward a biologically plausible evolutionary psychology. Psychol Bull 129:819–835
North DC (2005) Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Sperber D, Cara F, Girotto V (1995) Relevance theory explains the selection task. Cognition 52:3–39
Sperber D, Girotto V (2002) Use or misuse of the selection task? Cognition 85:277–290
Sperber D, Girotto V (2003) Does the selection task detect cheater-detector? In: Sterelny K, Fitness J (eds) From mate to mentality. Evaluating evolutionary psychology. Psychology Press, New York, pp 197–225
Stanovich K, West RF (1998) Cognitive ability and variation in selection task performance. Think Reasoning 4:193–288
Volscho TV (2005) Money and sex, the illusory universal sex difference: comment on Kanazawa. Sociol Q 46:719–736
Wason PC (1966) Reasoning. In: Foss BM (ed) New horizons in psychology. Harmondsworth, Penguin
Acknowledgements
Preparation of this paper was supported by a COFIN (2005117840_003) grant from the Italian Ministry of Universities and by a CIMeC grant from the SMC/Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Trento e Rovereto. We thank Vicenzo Crupi, Robert Lickliter, Luigi Lombardi and three anonymous referees for their comments on a previous version of the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Girotto, V., Tentori, K. Is domain-general thinking a domain-specific adaptation?. Mind Soc 7, 167–175 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-007-0045-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-007-0045-3