McKay & Dennett (M&D) convincingly argue against many proposals for adaptively functioning misbelief, but the conclusion that true beliefs are generally adaptive does not follow. Adaptive misbeliefs may be few in kind but many in number; maladaptive misbeliefs may routinely elude selective pruning; reproductively neutral misbeliefs may abound; and adaptively grounded beliefs may reliably covary with but not truthfully represent reality.

The central hyperexcitability observed in animal models supports a pathophysiological explanation for chronic human pain. Novel information on cholecystokinin (CCK) upregulation offers a rationale for reduced opioid response in neuropathic pain. However, the basic information provided by scientists should not lead clinicians to equate experimental models to chronic human conditions. Clinicians should provide careful reports and attempt to classify pathophysiologically clinical conditions that have so far been grouped generically. [blumberg et al.; coderre & katz; dickenson; wiesenfeld-hallin et al.]

We connect the Distancing-Embracing model to theoretical and empirical evidence regarding empathy, which raises questions about the ordering and modulation of distancing in particular. Namely, distancing may not be a binary, continuously on/off process. Rather we suggest that changes in distancing as actualized via the relation between the individual and art (e.g., through empathy) might be a useful avenue for further consideration.

Puritanical morality regulates a range of seemingly insignificant behaviors, including those involving human sexuality. A sizable portion of the latter particularly burdens women, who are held responsible for the moral conduct of men. In my paper, I show that these norms have not necessarily served to evolve cooperation, but to subjugate and eliminate women from public life.

We show that left-handers can be considered as a “special” population. We indicate that the asymmetries in performance exhibited by left-handers are due to a basic asymmetry in the underlying coordination dynamics that constrains bimanual coordination. In contrast to the claims of Latash & Anson, we argue that considerable knowledge has been gained regarding the essential equations of motion that govern biological coordination.

Archer provides seemingly compelling evidence for his claim that sexual selection explains sex differences in human aggression better than social role theory. I challenge Archer's interpretation of some of this evidence. I argue that the same evidence could be used to support the claim that what has been selected for is the ability to curb aggression and discuss implications for Archer's theory.

Studies of the role of imprinted genes in psychological phenomena are long overdue. The target article is comprehensive, presenting a wealth of important and convergent evidence, and provides an excellent point of departure for further research. However, the authors' evidentiary grasp exceeds the explicatory capacity of the proposed model. Greater genotypic and phenotypic precision would significantly enhance its predictive power.

Barbey & Sloman's (B&S's) base-rate respect model is anticipated by Reyna's denominator neglect model. There are parallels at three levels: (a) explanations are grounded in a general cognitive theory (rather than in domain-specific ideas); (b) problem structure is treated as a key source of reasoning errors; and most importantly, (c) nested set relations are seen as the cause of base-rate neglect.

Developmental psychology can shed light on (1) the intuitive systems that underlie folk-economic beliefs (FEBs), and (2) how FEBs are created and revised. Boyer & Petersen (B&P) acknowledge the first, but we argue that they do not seriously consider the second. FEBs vary across people (and within a person), and much of this variation may be explained by socialization, social context, and social learning.

To assess whether behaviors like framing effects are rational, researchers need to consider decision makers' goals. I argue that researchers should broaden the scope of analysis to include impression management goals. Under predictable conditions, behaviors traditionally considered irrational (e.g., loss–gain framing effects on risk preferences) can be reputationally rewarding, casting doubt on strict claims of irrationality.

Many autistic behaviours can rightly be classified as adaptive, but why these behaviours differ from adaptive neurotypical behaviours in the same environment requires explanation. I argue that predictive processing accounts best explain why autistic people engage different adaptive responses to the environment and, further, account for evidence left unexplained by the social motivation theory.