ANTH 332 Lab Assignment 2_ Hawks

docx

School

University of Oregon *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

332

Subject

Anthropology

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by sasalasa03

ANTH 332 Lab Assignment 2: “Evidence from hunter-gatherer and subsistence agricultural populations for the universality of contagion sensitivity” (Apicella et al. 2018) 1. What is the psychological phenomenon examined in this study? Define the phenomenon. Describe an example of the phenomenon given in the article. Give a second example that you have personally observed: be specific. The study examines the psychological phenomenon of contagion beliefs among the Hadza and Tannese Populations, specifically the undetected passing of properties between entities that come into physical contact. "Contagion beliefs about pathogens and poison are shaped by cultural input and experience" (Apicella et al. 2018:356). An example that was used in the article of this phenomenon is that "disgust-eliciting items reliably contaminate items once physical contact is made, regardless of the item it is contaminating, and does so, with precision. A pen and a spoon would become contaminated after contacting fecal matter, but these effects would not generalize to other uncontacted spoons and pens" (Apicella et al. 2018:356). Another example I have observed of a contagion phenomenon is rumors through social media. With the rise of social media apps on college campuses, most notably "Yik Yak" and "Snapchat," students can anonymously post rumors about any organization or individual with no consequences. These posts spread rapidly throughout campus and gained notoriety among the students. 2. What is the study’s hypothesis? The study hypothesizes that in the Hadza population, sex differences tie in directly to food preferences, and contagion beliefs heighten this hypothesis as men and women respond differently to different continent pathogens. 3. What were the study populations? What was the researchers’ rationale for using these populations? What bias is avoided by using these populations? The study population focused on 179 individuals from two different hunter/gatherer communities, The Hadza and the Tannassee. 117 individuals were taken from the Hadza community, while the remaining 63 were taken from the Tannasee population. For data collection, these study groups were split reasonably equally between men and women and adults and juveniles. From the pool of 117 Hadza participants, there were 50 men and 67 women. Similarly, in the Tanasee population, there were 20 children, 21 adolescents, and 22 adults. The goal of focusing on these specific copulations and focusing on different gender and age groups is to have a more streamlined outcome on the data and ultimately avoid sampling bias. 4. What were the study’s predictions? (make sure to include all the predictions) The study predictions were: ● “We predicted that children (6–11-year-olds) would be more rejected than older children or adults of all items that make contact, whether or not a potential pathogen might be involved.” (Apicella et al. 2018:357).

● “We also predicted that with age, maturation, experience, and socialization, rejection would focus more on contacts with entities that would potentially be contaminants. Reference to germs would suggest some cultural contamination, given the late arrival of germ theory in Western cultures” (Apicella et al. 2018:357). 5. What methods were used to test the predictions in each population? Interviews amongst grouped individuals were used to test the predictions in each population. To test these predictions, the researchers collected data by asking participants to name a food they found disgusting and would refuse to eat. These participants were then asked if they liked eating hyena meat and to provide a reason. 6. What was the mean (mathematical average) rejection rate among the Hadza for the three contaminants compared to the control? What was the mean rejection rate among the Tannese across the four contaminants, compared to the controls? “For the Hadza, the mean rejection rate was 94% for the three contaminants in both honey and boiling broth, compared to the control item (a bead), where rejections averaged 68%. Because we used honey and broth, we can rule out the possibility that food type drives the results. The results from the Tannese correspond well to those from the Hadza; there was a mean rejection rate of 94% across the four contaminants, compared to 66.5% for the four controls” (Apicella et al. 2018:361). 7. Among the Hadza, what was the most common reason given for not eating each of the following (include percentage): Honey contaminated by coughing? ● 0.05: “The most common reason reported for not eating honey was fear of getting sick (94%). Some participants even mentioned the possibility of contracting tuberculosis” (Apicella et al. 2018:361). Broth contaminated by coughing? ● 0.11: “For the broth, sickness was also the most common reason cited for not eating the broth after a cough (63%) though the number of participants ci4ng this as a concern decreased, and the number of participants who restated the presence of someone coughing in the broth increased (29%). Inter- es4ngly, four of the individuals who said that they would eat the broth aMer a sick Hadza coughed over it claimed that boiling ac4on would kill the germs/disease.” (Apicella et al. 2018:358). Honey contaminated by poison? ● 0.04: “The contaminant was poison; the vast majority of participants claimed that they would not eat the honey (94%) or broth (98%) because it was poisonous” (Apicella et al. 2018:358). Broth contaminated by poison? ● 0.00: Same quote as previous

Honey contaminated by beads? ● 0.44: “The most common reason for not eating the honey after being contaminated with a bead was dirtiness (41%), but the most common response was that it was okay to eat the honey after contacting the bead (42%)” (Apicella et al. 2018:358). Broth contaminated by beads? ● 0.40: “Because of the presence of the bead in the broth (52%), while many also stated that it was okay to eat the broth (39%). (Apicella et al. 2018:358). 8. Although mean (mathematical average) rejection rates were higher for contaminants than for control items, mean rejection rates for the latter were still fairly high. Given the study’s hypothesis, what is a possible explanation for this response to non- contaminants? In other words, does this finding falsify the hypothesis or provide support for it? These findings support the hypothesis because they prove that contagion principles are common in human populations. Thus, each group's disgust towards the contaminated food is widespread and aimed at preventing contact with a disease. Through these findings, we are shown that contagion sensitivity is learned and flexible to local cultural contexts. In conclusion, "the basic contagion response is present by age six (or younger). These results provide some of the strongest support for the position that contagion sensitivity is a universal feature of human cognition. The results also provide evidence that, together with the emotion of disgust, contagion is part of a system that evolved to prevent exposure to dangerous and pathogenic items" (Apicella et al. 2018:362).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

ANTH 332 Lab Assignment 2_ Hawks

Related Documents