Rolls's presentation of emotion as integral to cognition is a welcome counter to a long tradition of treating them as antagonists. His eduction of experimental evidence in support of this view is impressive. However, we find his excursion into the philosophy of consciousness less successful. Rolls gives syntactical manipulation the central role in consciousness (in stark contrast to Searle, for whom “mere” syntax inevitably falls short of consciousness), and leaves us wondering about the roles left for emotion after all.

Clahsen has added to the body of evidence that, on average, regular and irregular inflected words behave differently. However, the dual-mechanism account he supports predicts a crisp distinction; the empirical data instead suggest a fuzzy one, more in line with single-mechanism connectionist models.

The description of the mirror neuron system provided by Cook et al. is incomplete for the macaque, and incorrect for humans. This is relevant to exaptation versus associative learning as the underlying mechanism generating mirror neurons, and to the sensorimotor learning as evidence for the authors' viewpoint. The proposed additional testing of the mirror system in rodents is unrealistic.

Many neo-Darwinists treat natural selection of genes and individual organisms as broadly equivalent. This enables Wilson & Sober (W&S) to propose a multilevel group selection model by drawing parallels between individuals and groups. The notion of gene/individual equivalence is a profound misconception. Its elimination negates W&S's current approach but offers the best way forward for both life and behavioural sciences.

The metaphor drug model of money slights the possibility that money may literally tap into and exploit brain systems underlying motivational systems, and it also ignores growing evidence on the common neural substrates of behavioral and “physiological” addictions. Additionally, many objects other than money can gain such drug-like properties. The treatment of play in the evolutionary explanation for the unique role of money in people ignores key conceptual and empirical issues.

In the integrative memory model proposed by Bastin et al., familiarity is thought to arise from attribution of fluency signals. We suggest that, from a computational and anatomical perspective, this conceptualization converges with a global-matching account of familiarity assessment. We also argue that consideration of global matching and evidence accumulation in decision making could help further our understanding of the proposed attribution system.

In a surface-dwelling animal like the rat, experimental strategies for investigating the hippocampal correlates of three-dimensional space appear inevitably complicated by the interplay of global versus local reference frames. We discuss the impact of the resulting confounds on present and future empirical analysis of the “bicoded map” hypothesis by Jeffery and colleagues.

Richerson et al. establish cultural group selection as a plausible force in human social evolution. However, they do not demonstrate its causal precedence for any trait, let alone its “essentialness.” To do so, they must show that a particular group trait was caused by cultural transmission, and directly caused differences in group fitness.

We agree that external validity of social psychological experiments is a concern, we disagree these models are useless. Experiments, reconsidered from a situated cognition perspective and non-linearly combined with other methods (qualitative and simulations) allow grasping decision dynamics beyond bias outcomes. Dynamic (vs. discrete) insights regarding these processes are key to understand missing forces and bias in real-world social groups.