DCIDE框架:进化假说的系统研究,以自闭症为例。

IF 11.7 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
Adam D. Hunt, Adrian V. Jaeggi
{"title":"DCIDE框架:进化假说的系统研究,以自闭症为例。","authors":"Adam D. Hunt,&nbsp;Adrian V. Jaeggi","doi":"10.1111/brv.70010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Evolutionary explanations of mental disorders are a longstanding aim of evolutionary psychiatry, but have suffered from complexities including within-disorder heterogeneity and environmental effects of contemporary societies obscuring possible ancestral functions. Studying the relevant processes of human evolution directly is not possible, so hypotheses have remained speculative, exaggerating “just-so storytelling” critiques. This is despite significant evidence existing in genetics, neuroscience and epidemiology, all of which bears some inferential relevance to evolutionary hypotheses, but which is often not marshalled in a systematic way. To utilise this evidence best to investigate evolutionary explanations of psychiatric (or other) traits we present a novel framework of evidence synthesis and analysis and exemplify it by systematically reviewing evidence related to autism. In the five stages of this “DCIDE framework” analysis, Description identifies a trait to explain and Categorisation initially excludes verifiably non-adaptive cases by utilising evidence from genetics, neuroscience, and environmental factors. Integration then hones a target for adaptive explanation by considering evidence of age of onset, environmental effects, duration, prevalence and sex differences, incorporating relevant correlated traits visible to selection. Evolutionary hypotheses are then Depicted and Evaluated for their ability to explain all the evidence at hand, using standardised areas of evidence and theoretically motivated principles (e.g. traits arising at birth and lasting for life have different plausible explanations than traits arising in adolescence and receding in adulthood). Competing evolutionary hypotheses can thus be systematically compared for their sufficiency in explaining a wide range of available evidence. In the DCIDE review of autism, when Described with current diagnostic criteria, up to 20% of cases Categorise as non-adaptive, primarily caused by <i>de novo</i> mutations and environmental trauma. The remaining cases are eligible for adaptive explanation. For Integrating genetically correlated phenotypes, evidence of high prevalence of subclinical familial traits and camouflaged female cases is necessary. Competing Depictions contrast a high intelligence by-product hypothesis with social niche specialisation for high “systemising” cognition. In Evaluation, broad evidence supports the social niche hypothesis while the intelligence by-product hypothesis fails to predict various lines of evidence. This provides not only the most robust synthesis of autism research relevant to evolutionary explanation to date, but is a first example of how the structure of the DCIDE framework can allow improved systematic evolutionary analysis across psychiatric conditions, and may also be adopted to strengthen evolutionary psychology more generally, countering just-so storytelling and cherry-picking critiques.</p>","PeriodicalId":133,"journal":{"name":"Biological Reviews","volume":"100 4","pages":"1484-1511"},"PeriodicalIF":11.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/brv.70010","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The DCIDE framework: systematic investigation of evolutionary hypotheses, exemplified with autism\",\"authors\":\"Adam D. Hunt,&nbsp;Adrian V. Jaeggi\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/brv.70010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Evolutionary explanations of mental disorders are a longstanding aim of evolutionary psychiatry, but have suffered from complexities including within-disorder heterogeneity and environmental effects of contemporary societies obscuring possible ancestral functions. Studying the relevant processes of human evolution directly is not possible, so hypotheses have remained speculative, exaggerating “just-so storytelling” critiques. This is despite significant evidence existing in genetics, neuroscience and epidemiology, all of which bears some inferential relevance to evolutionary hypotheses, but which is often not marshalled in a systematic way. To utilise this evidence best to investigate evolutionary explanations of psychiatric (or other) traits we present a novel framework of evidence synthesis and analysis and exemplify it by systematically reviewing evidence related to autism. In the five stages of this “DCIDE framework” analysis, Description identifies a trait to explain and Categorisation initially excludes verifiably non-adaptive cases by utilising evidence from genetics, neuroscience, and environmental factors. Integration then hones a target for adaptive explanation by considering evidence of age of onset, environmental effects, duration, prevalence and sex differences, incorporating relevant correlated traits visible to selection. Evolutionary hypotheses are then Depicted and Evaluated for their ability to explain all the evidence at hand, using standardised areas of evidence and theoretically motivated principles (e.g. traits arising at birth and lasting for life have different plausible explanations than traits arising in adolescence and receding in adulthood). Competing evolutionary hypotheses can thus be systematically compared for their sufficiency in explaining a wide range of available evidence. In the DCIDE review of autism, when Described with current diagnostic criteria, up to 20% of cases Categorise as non-adaptive, primarily caused by <i>de novo</i> mutations and environmental trauma. The remaining cases are eligible for adaptive explanation. For Integrating genetically correlated phenotypes, evidence of high prevalence of subclinical familial traits and camouflaged female cases is necessary. Competing Depictions contrast a high intelligence by-product hypothesis with social niche specialisation for high “systemising” cognition. In Evaluation, broad evidence supports the social niche hypothesis while the intelligence by-product hypothesis fails to predict various lines of evidence. This provides not only the most robust synthesis of autism research relevant to evolutionary explanation to date, but is a first example of how the structure of the DCIDE framework can allow improved systematic evolutionary analysis across psychiatric conditions, and may also be adopted to strengthen evolutionary psychology more generally, countering just-so storytelling and cherry-picking critiques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biological Reviews\",\"volume\":\"100 4\",\"pages\":\"1484-1511\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/brv.70010\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biological Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.70010\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.70010","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

精神疾病的进化解释是进化精神病学的一个长期目标,但一直受到复杂性的影响,包括疾病内部的异质性和当代社会的环境影响,使可能的祖先功能变得模糊。直接研究人类进化的相关过程是不可能的,所以假设仍然是推测性的,夸大了“只是讲故事”的批评。尽管在遗传学、神经科学和流行病学中存在大量证据,所有这些都与进化假设有一定的推论关系,但往往没有以系统的方式进行整理。为了最好地利用这些证据来研究精神病学(或其他)特征的进化解释,我们提出了一个新的证据合成和分析框架,并通过系统地回顾与自闭症有关的证据来举例说明。在此“DCIDE框架”分析的五个阶段中,Description确定要解释的特征,而Categorisation最初通过利用遗传学,神经科学和环境因素的证据排除可验证的非适应性病例。然后,通过考虑发病年龄、环境影响、持续时间、流行程度和性别差异的证据,整合在选择中可见的相关特征,为适应性解释寻找目标。然后,使用标准化的证据领域和理论激励原则(例如,在出生时产生并持续一生的特征与在青春期产生并在成年期消退的特征有不同的似是而非的解释),对进化假设进行描述和评估,以解释其解释所有现有证据的能力。因此,可以系统地比较相互竞争的进化假说,看它们是否足以解释广泛的现有证据。在DCIDE对自闭症的审查中,当用目前的诊断标准描述时,多达20%的病例被归类为非适应性,主要由新生突变和环境创伤引起。其余的情况有资格进行适应性解释。为了整合遗传相关表型,亚临床家族性特征和伪装女性病例的高患病率的证据是必要的。竞争性描述将高智能副产品假说与高度“系统化”认知的社会利基专业化进行了对比。在评价中,广泛的证据支持社会生态位假说,而智力副产品假说无法预测各种证据线。这不仅提供了迄今为止与进化解释相关的自闭症研究的最有力的综合,而且是DCIDE框架结构如何允许对精神疾病进行改进的系统进化分析的第一个例子,也可能被采用来加强更普遍的进化心理学,反对只是讲故事和挑选挑选的批评。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The DCIDE framework: systematic investigation of evolutionary hypotheses, exemplified with autism

The DCIDE framework: systematic investigation of evolutionary hypotheses, exemplified with autism

Evolutionary explanations of mental disorders are a longstanding aim of evolutionary psychiatry, but have suffered from complexities including within-disorder heterogeneity and environmental effects of contemporary societies obscuring possible ancestral functions. Studying the relevant processes of human evolution directly is not possible, so hypotheses have remained speculative, exaggerating “just-so storytelling” critiques. This is despite significant evidence existing in genetics, neuroscience and epidemiology, all of which bears some inferential relevance to evolutionary hypotheses, but which is often not marshalled in a systematic way. To utilise this evidence best to investigate evolutionary explanations of psychiatric (or other) traits we present a novel framework of evidence synthesis and analysis and exemplify it by systematically reviewing evidence related to autism. In the five stages of this “DCIDE framework” analysis, Description identifies a trait to explain and Categorisation initially excludes verifiably non-adaptive cases by utilising evidence from genetics, neuroscience, and environmental factors. Integration then hones a target for adaptive explanation by considering evidence of age of onset, environmental effects, duration, prevalence and sex differences, incorporating relevant correlated traits visible to selection. Evolutionary hypotheses are then Depicted and Evaluated for their ability to explain all the evidence at hand, using standardised areas of evidence and theoretically motivated principles (e.g. traits arising at birth and lasting for life have different plausible explanations than traits arising in adolescence and receding in adulthood). Competing evolutionary hypotheses can thus be systematically compared for their sufficiency in explaining a wide range of available evidence. In the DCIDE review of autism, when Described with current diagnostic criteria, up to 20% of cases Categorise as non-adaptive, primarily caused by de novo mutations and environmental trauma. The remaining cases are eligible for adaptive explanation. For Integrating genetically correlated phenotypes, evidence of high prevalence of subclinical familial traits and camouflaged female cases is necessary. Competing Depictions contrast a high intelligence by-product hypothesis with social niche specialisation for high “systemising” cognition. In Evaluation, broad evidence supports the social niche hypothesis while the intelligence by-product hypothesis fails to predict various lines of evidence. This provides not only the most robust synthesis of autism research relevant to evolutionary explanation to date, but is a first example of how the structure of the DCIDE framework can allow improved systematic evolutionary analysis across psychiatric conditions, and may also be adopted to strengthen evolutionary psychology more generally, countering just-so storytelling and cherry-picking critiques.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biological Reviews
Biological Reviews 生物-生物学
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biological Reviews is a scientific journal that covers a wide range of topics in the biological sciences. It publishes several review articles per issue, which are aimed at both non-specialist biologists and researchers in the field. The articles are scholarly and include extensive bibliographies. Authors are instructed to be aware of the diverse readership and write their articles accordingly. The reviews in Biological Reviews serve as comprehensive introductions to specific fields, presenting the current state of the art and highlighting gaps in knowledge. Each article can be up to 20,000 words long and includes an abstract, a thorough introduction, and a statement of conclusions. The journal focuses on publishing synthetic reviews, which are based on existing literature and address important biological questions. These reviews are interesting to a broad readership and are timely, often related to fast-moving fields or new discoveries. A key aspect of a synthetic review is that it goes beyond simply compiling information and instead analyzes the collected data to create a new theoretical or conceptual framework that can significantly impact the field. Biological Reviews is abstracted and indexed in various databases, including Abstracts on Hygiene & Communicable Diseases, Academic Search, AgBiotech News & Information, AgBiotechNet, AGRICOLA Database, GeoRef, Global Health, SCOPUS, Weed Abstracts, and Reaction Citation Index, among others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信