Electrodermal activity during Lower Paleolithic stone tool handling

Fedato, Annapaola; Silva‐Gago, María; Bernal, Marcos Terradillos; Alcalde, Rodrigo Alonso; Martín-Guerra, Elena; Bruner, Emiliano

doi:10.1002/ajhb.23279

Cited by 16 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As reported in a previous survey (Fedato et al, ), females show a higher mean and larger variation than males for both EDL and EDR ( P = 0.02 and P = 0.01 respectively). EDL and EDR show a moderate correlation ( r = −.63, P < .001), which is stronger in females than in males ( r females = −.67, r males = −.41).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 82%

“…This study was performed on a sample of 46 right‐handed adult individuals (22 females and 24 males) with ages ranging from 21 to 65 years old. The previous general analysis on the same sample suggests that electrodermal activity is not influenced by age (Fedato et al, ). This survey aims to evaluate the electrodermal reaction during haptic exploration of distinct lithic tools, without any specific functional task.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Bearing these patterns of hand morphological variation among adult humans in mind, we tested the correlation between hand metrics and electrodermal reactions during haptic exploration of stone tools. Previous analyses showed that there are subtle but consistent electrodermal differences when exploring different kinds of stone tools, and between males and females (Fedato et al, ). Correlations between hand diameters (F3 and F4) and hand size (PC1) with the two electrodermal variables are significant only when sexes are pooled together, but there is no correlation when males and females are analyzed separately.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Tool haptic exploration triggers an electrodermal reaction that is interpreted as a proxy for arousal and attentional changes (Bruner, et al, ). During stone tool handling, females display larger variation toward higher reactions than males (Fedato et al, ). Such differences can be associated with sexual differences in perception or engagement, or else to allometric factors, due to hand size differences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…EDA fluctuations are used as proxy for emotional and attentional engagement (Boucsein, ; Dawson, Schell, & Filion, ), and can be used to measure psychophysiological variation during haptic stimulation (Greco et al, ). Different stone tools exert different electrophysiological reactions, with modest but significant differences between tool types (handaxes and choppers) and between males and females (Fedato et al, ). Choppers trigger, on average, more arousal and more attentional reaction than handaxes, although they require a shorter manipulation time to reach a stable and comfortable position (choppers: 13.0 seconds; handaxes: 17.5 seconds).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Hand morphometrics, electrodermal activity, and stone tools haptic perception

Fedato

Silva‐Gago

Bernal

et al. 2019

American J Hum Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Tool use requires integration among sensorial, biomechanical, and cognitive factors. Taking into account the importance of tool use in human evolution, changes associated with the genus Homo are to be expected in all these three aspects. Haptics is based on both tactile and proprioceptive feedbacks, and it is associated with emotional reactions. Previous analyses have suggested a difference between males and females, and during haptic exploration of different typologies of stone tools. Here, we analyze the correlation between electrodermal reactions during stone tool handling and hand morphology to provide evidence of possible allometric factors shared by males and females.Methods: Electrodermal analysis was used to investigate some specific parameters involved in these reactions, such as changes in the level of attention and arousal. We analyzed the responses of 46 right-handed adults to 20 distinct stone tools while blindfolded. Results: Females have smaller hands and a wider range of electrodermal reactions. Within males and females, hand diameters and general hand size do not correlate with the degree of electrodermal level and response.Conclusions: Sex differences in electrodemal reaction during stone tool handling are apparently not due to the effect of hand size or proportions. Differences between males and females are better interpreted as real sex differences, either due to a biological or cultural influences. Hand size does not influence the degree of arousal or attention during tool exploration, suggesting that other factors trigger individual reactions. These results add to a general cognitive approach on hand-tool evolution and tool sensing.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Hand morphometrics, electrodermal activity, and stone tools haptic perception

Fedato

Silva‐Gago

Bernal

et al. 2019

American J Hum Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Not a matter of shape: The influence of tool characteristics on electrodermal activity in response to haptic exploration of Lower Palaeolithic tools

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Haptics involves somatosensory perception through the skin surface and dynamic touch based on the proprioceptive response of the whole body. Handling Palaeolithic stone tools influences the arousal and attentional engagement, which can be detected and measured through electrodermal activity. Although tool shape has generally been studied to consider tool functions or tool making, it is also a major factor in tool sensing and haptic perception. The purpose of this survey is to analyze whether the electrodermal reactions are influenced by stone tool morphology. Methods We first quantify the morphological variability of 72 stone tools through geometric morphometrics. Then, 12 stone tools from the previous sample were randomly selected to perform the electrodermal analysis in a sample of 46 right‐handed adults. Results Elongation is the main factor involved in Lower Palaeolithic shape variation, followed by the position of the maximum thickness. Attention and manipulation time are mainly influenced by tool size, while arousal mostly correlates with tool weight. Electrodermal activity is apparently not influenced by the overall tool shape. Tool size, weight, and base morphology are the variables that mainly trigger an electrodermal reaction. Conclusions Electrophysiological reaction is more sensitive to specific physical features of the tool than to its general outline. These features are not particularly different in worked pebbles and handaxes in terms of grasping, but underwent remarkable changes in other technological traditions. That changes associated with behavioral performances can be employed in cognitive archaeology to investigate the relationships between tool sensing and tool use.

show abstract

Cognitive archaeology, and the psychological assessment of extinct minds

Bruner

2024

J of Comparative Neurology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolutionary anthropology relies on both neontological and paleontological information. In the latter case, fields such as paleoneurology, neuroarchaeology, and cognitive archaeology are supplying new perspectives in prehistory and neuroscience. Cognitive archaeology, in particular, investigates the behaviors associated with extinct species or cultures according to specific psychological models. For example, changes in working memory, attention, or visuospatial integration can be postulated when related behavioral changes are described in the archaeological record. However, cognition is a process based on different and partially independent functional elements, and extinct species could hence have evolved distinct combinations of cognitive abilities or features, based on both quantitative and qualitative differences. Accordingly, differences in working memory can lead to more conceptual or more holistic mindsets, with important changes in the perception and management of the mental experience. The parietal cortex is particularly interesting, in this sense, being involved in functions associated with body–tool integration, attention, and visual imaging. In some cases, evolutionary mismatches among these elements can induce drawbacks that, despite their positive effects on natural selection, can introduce important constraints in our own mental skills. Beyond the theoretical background, some hypotheses can be tested following methods in experimental psychology. In any case, theories in cognitive evolution must acknowledge that, beyond the brain and its biology, the human mind is also deeply rooted in body perception, in social networks, and in technological extension.

show abstract

Electrodermal activity during Lower Paleolithic stone tool handling

Cited by 16 publications

References 59 publications

Hand morphometrics, electrodermal activity, and stone tools haptic perception

Hand morphometrics, electrodermal activity, and stone tools haptic perception

Not a matter of shape: The influence of tool characteristics on electrodermal activity in response to haptic exploration of Lower Palaeolithic tools

Cognitive archaeology, and the psychological assessment of extinct minds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About