School of Psychology

• BSc Psychology
• MSc Psychology
• MPhil/PhD

• Module leader for PY3114 Evolutionary Approaches to Behaviour (level three)
• Module leader for PY2120 Animal Behaviour Field Trip (level two)
• Teaches on PY2103 and PYM151 Psychobiology (level two and M-level)
• Project supervision (level three)

Peer-reviewed Articles:

1. Dickins, T.E. (2009). Changes in art: market forces or evolution. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27(2), 159–165. doi:10.2190/EM.27.2.g
2. Dickins, T.E. (2009). Psychology, biology and the market place. Psychology Teaching Review, 14(2), 17–20.
3. Nettle, D., Coall, D.A., & Dickins, T.E. (2009). Birthweight and paternal involvement affect the likelihood of teenage motherhood: Evidence from the British National Child Development Study. American Journal of Human Biology.
4. Dickins, T.E., & Dickins, B.J.A. (2008). Mother Nature’s tolerant ways: Why non-genetic inheritance has nothing to do with evolution. New Ideas in Psychology, 26, 41–54. doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2007.03.004
5. Dickins, T.E., & Sergeant, M.J.T. (2008). Social dominance and sexual orientation. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 6(1), 57–71. doi:10.1556/JEP.2008.1003
6. Levene, R., & Dickins, T.E. (2008). Sex-related invariance across cultures in an online role-playing game. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 6(2), 141–148. doi:10.1556/JEP.2008.1010
7. Dickins, T.E., Sear, R., & Wells, A.J. (2007). Mind the gap(s) ... in theory mind and data: re-examining Kanazawa (2006). British Journal of Health Psychology, 12, 167–178. doi:10.1348/135910707X174339
8. Sear, R., Lawson, D., & Dickins, T.E. (2007). Synthesis in the human evolutionary behavioural sciences. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 5, 3–28. doi:10.1556/JEP.2007.1019
9. Sergeant, M.J.T., Dickins, T.E., Davies, M.N.O., & Griffiths, M.D. (2007). Women’s hedonic ratings of body odour of heterosexual and homosexual men. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 36(3), 395–401. doi:10.1007/s10508-006-9126-3
10. Dickins, T.E. (2006). Evolutionary health psychology. Health Psychology Update, 15(1), 4–10.
11. Dickins, T.E. (2006). Evolutionary health psychology. Health Psychology Update, 15(1), 4–10.
12. Sergeant, M.J.T., Dickins, T.E., Davies, M.N.O., & Griffiths, M.D. (2006). Aggression, empathy and sexual orientation in males. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 475–486. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.07.002
13. Dickins, T.E. (2005). Can there ever be a non-specific adaptation? A response to Hampton. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 35(3), 329–340. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.2005.00275.x
14. Sergeant, M.J.T., Davies, M.N.O., Dickins, T.E., & Griffiths, M.D. (2005). The self-reported importance of olfaction during human mate choice. Sexualities, Evolution and Gender, 7, 199–213. doi:10.1080/14616660500173685
15. Dickins, T.E. (2004). Social constructionism as cognitive science. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 34(4), 333–352. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.2004.00253.x
16. Dickins, T.E., & Law, K.R. (2004). Cognitive science: The state of the art. History and Philosophy of Psychology, 6(1), 1–3.
17. Dickins, T.E. (2003). General symbol machines: The first stage in the evolution of symbolic communication. Evolutionary Psychology, 1, 192–209.
18. Dickins, T.E. (2003). What can evolutionary psychology tell us about cognitive architecture?. History and Philosophy of Psychology, 5(1), 1–16.
19. Dickins, T.E. (2002). A behaviourist’s perspective on the origins of language. History and Philosophy of Psychology, 4(1), 31–42.
20. Dickins, T.E., & Dickins, D.W. (2001). Symbols, stimulus equivalence and the origins of language. Behavior and Philosophy, 29, 221–244.

Peer-reviewed Commentaries:

1. Dickins, T.E., & Sergeant, M.T. (2009). Two more things for consideration: Sexual orientation and conduct disorder [Commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 275. doi:10.1017/S0140525X09990252
2. Dickins, B.J.A., Dickins, D.W., & Dickins, T.E. (2008). Is this conjectural phenotypic dichotomy a plausible outcome of genomic imprinting? [Commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(3), 267–268. doi:10.1017/S0140525X08004287
3. Dickins, T.E., & Dickins, B.J.A. (2007). Designed calibration: Naturally selected flexibility, not non-genetic inheritance [Commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(4), 368–369. doi:10.1017/S0140525X07002269
4. Dickins, T.E. (2006). The phylogeny and ontogeny of adaptations [Commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29(3), 283–284. doi:10.1017/S0140525X06279068
5. Dickins, T.E. (2003). Possible phylogenies: The role of hypotheses, weak inferences, and falsification [Commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26(2), 219–220. doi:10.1017/S0140525X03340063
6. Dickins, T.E., & Dickins, D.W. (2002). Is empirical imagination a constraint on adaptationist theory construction? [Commentary]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(4), 515–516. doi:10.1017/S0140525X02320090

Chapters:

1. Sergeant, M., Dickins, T.E., & Davies, M.N.O. (2004). The de-scent of man: The case for and against human pheromones. In P. Hills (Ed.), Aspects of Human Communication (Vol. 1, p. 70–86): Peter Francis Publishers.
2. Dickins, T.E., & Levy, J.P. (2001). Evolution, development and learning - a nested hierarchy? In R.M. French & J.P. Sougné (Eds.), Connectionist Models of Learning, Development and Evolution: Proceedings of the Sixth Neural Computation and Psychology Workshop. London: Springer-Verlag.

Reviews:

1. Dickins, T.E. (2005). Challenging the rational choice theorist perspective: A review of Evans, D., & Cruse, P. (2004) Emotion, Evolution and Rationality. Oxford University Press. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–3.
2. Dickins, T.E. (2005). On the aims of evolutionary theory: A review of Odling-Smee, J.J., Laland, K.N., & Feldman, M.W. (2003) Niche Construction: The Neglected Process in Evolution. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.. Evolutionary Psychology, 3, 79–84.
3. Dickins, T.E. (2003). Review of Evolutionary Interpretations of World Politics edited by William R. Thompson.. Human Nature Review, 3, 111–113.
4. Dickins, T.E. (2002). Review of The Imagined World Made Real: Towards a Natural Science of Culture by Henry Plotkin. Human Nature Review, 2, 392–397.

Public letters:

1. Dickins, Tom (2004). Sex and orientation. Times Higher Education Supplement, 1644 (June 11), 19.
2. Dickins, Tom, & Sergeant, Mark (2004). Encouraging open debate. The Psychologist, 17 (4) 184.
3. Dickins, Tom (2001). Hypotheses and Hyperbole. The Psychologist, 14 (9) 458.

Peer-reviewed Publications:

1. Dickins, T.E. (2000). A non-modular suggestion about the origin of symbols. In: Desalles, J-L & Ghadakpour, L. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Evolution of Language Conference, Ecole Nationale Superieure des Telecommunications.
2. Dickins, T.E. (2000). A ‘considered’ evolutionary perspective on the ‘glass ceiling’. Psychology, Evolution and Gender, 2 (2) 161–166. doi:10.1080/14616660050200940
3. Norton, L., Scantlebury, E., & Dickins, T.E. (1999). Helping undergraduates to become more effective learners: an evaluation of two learning interventions. Innovations in Education and Training International. 36 (4) 273–284.
4. Norton, L.S., Thomas, S., Morgan, K., Tilley, A., & Dickins, T.E. (1998). Full-time studying and long-term relationships: make or break for mature students? British Journal of Guidance and Counselling. 26 (1) 75–88.
5. Norton, L.S., Dickins, T.E., & McLaughlin Cook, N. (1996) ‘Rules of the game’ in essay writing. Psychology Teaching Review. 5 (1) 1–13.
6. Norton, L. S., Dickins, T.E., & McLaughlin Cook, N. (1996). Coursework assessment: What tutors are really looking for? In: G. Gibbs [Ed.] Improving Student Learning: Using Research to Improve Student Learning. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development.
7. Norton, L .S., & Dickins, T.E. (1995). Do approaches to learning courses improve students’ learning strategies? In: G. Gibbs [Ed.] Improving Student Learning: Through Assessment and Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development.

Chapters:

1. Dickins, T.E. (1998). Words, Protolanguage and Mind. In: M.C. Chung [Ed.] Current Trends in the History and Philosophy of Psychology: Volume I. Leicester: The British Psychological Society Press.
2. Chung, M.C., & Dickins, T.E. (1997). Similarities between Kierkegaard’s Despairing Self and Higgins’s Self Discrepancy. In: M.C. Chung [Ed.] Psychological Concepts from Philosophical and Historical Perspectives. Leicester: The British Psychological Society Press.

Reviews:

1. Dickins, T.E. (2000). A review of S. Pinker (1997) How the Mind Works Allen Lane: The Penguin Press. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21(1), 155–157. doi:10.1017/S014271640023107X
2. Dickins, T.E. (2000). A sophisticated determinism: A review essay of J. McKnight (1997) Straight Science? Homosexuality, Evolution and Adaptation. Psychology, Evolution and Gender, 2(2), 174–184.
3. Dickins, T.E. (1999). A review of H. Hendriks-Jansen (1996) Catching Ourselves in the Act MIT Press and P.S. Churchland and P.M. Churchland (1998) On the Contrary MIT Press. History and Philosophy of Psychology. 1 (1) 91–96.
4. Dickins, T.E. (1998). A review of M. Hauser (1997) The Evolution of Communication MIT Press. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19 (2) 333–335. doi:10.1017/S0142716400010092
5. Grant, C.M., & Dickins, T.E. (1998). A review of S. Baron-Cohen (1995) Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind MIT Press, British Psychological Society, Developmental Psychology Section Newsletter. 48, 26–31.
6. Dickins, T.E. (1998). Conference Report: The British Psychological Society 1997 Book Award Lecture. The Psychologist. 11 (3) 99–100.
7. Grant, C.M., & Dickins, T.E. (1998). A review of S. Baron-Cohen (1995) Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind MIT Press, British Psychological Society, Developmental Psychology Section Newsletter. 48, 26–31.
8. Dickins, T.E. (1997). A review of D. Bickerton (1996) Language and Human Behaviour UCL Press. Applied Psycholinguistics. 18 (3) 378–389. doi:10.1017/S0142716400010535
9. Dickins, T.E. (1997). A review of W. Noble & I. Davidson (1996) Human Evolution, Language and Mind Cambridge University Press. British Psychological Society, History and Philosophy of Psychology Newsletter. 25, 31–34.
10. Dickins, T.E. (1997). A review of J. Aitchison (1996) The Seeds of Speech: Language Origin and Evolution. Cambridge University Press. Applied Psycholinguistics. 18 (2) 237–242. doi:10.1017/S0142716400009991
11. Dickins, T.E., & Frankish, K. (1997). A review of D.C. Dennett (1996) Kinds of Minds. Weidenfeld and Nicolson. British Psychological Society, History and Philosophy of Psychology Newsletter. 24, 36–40.
12. Dickins, T.E., & Grant, C.M. (1997). Conference report: The British Psychological Society Annual Conference 1997. British Psychological Society, Developmental Psychology Section Newsletter. 47, 16–19.
13. Dickins, T.E. (1996). A review of R. Dunbar (1996) Grooming, Gossip and the Evolution of Language. Faber and Faber. British Psychological Society, History and Philosophy of Psychology Newsletter. 23, 38–43.
14. Dickins, T.E. (1996). A review of: M. Killen & D. Hart [Eds.] (1995) Morality in everyday life: Developmental perspectives. Cambridge University Press. British Psychological Society, History and Philosophy of Psychology Newsletter. 22, 29–31.

Public letters:

1. Dickins, Tom (1999). Lesbians, gays and social constructionism. The Psychologist. 12 (3) 113.

Membership:

• British Society for the Philosophy of Science
• Founder member of the European Human Behaviour and Evolution Association
• Fellow and Council Member of the Galton Institute
• Associate of the Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Social Constructionism as Cognitive Science

Dickins, T.E.

Social constructionism is a broad position that emphasizes the importance of human social processes in psychology. These processes are generally associated with language and the ability to construct stories that conform to the emergent rules of ‘language games’. This view allows one to espouse a variety of critical postures with regard to realist commitments within the social and behavioural sciences, ranging from outright relativism (language constructs all of our concepts) to a more moderate respect for the ‘barrier’ that linguistic descriptions can place between us and reality. This paper first outlines some possible social constructionist viewpoints and then goes on to show how each of them conforms to the basic principles of information theory. After establishing this relation the paper then argues that this leads to a deal of commonality between social constructionist positions and the baseline aims of cognitive science. Finally, the paper argues that if information theory is held in common this both suggests future research collaborations and helps to ‘mop up’ some of the arguments surrounding realist commitments.

General Symbol Machines: The first stage in the evolution of symbolic communication

Dickins, T.E.

Humans uniquely form stimulus equivalence (SE) classes of abstract and unrelated stimuli, i.e. if taught to match A with B and B with C, they will spontaneously match B with A, and C with B, (the relation of symmetry), and A with C (transitivity). Other species do not do this. The SE ability is possibly the consequence of a specific selection event in the Homo lineage. SE is of interest because it appears to demonstrate a facility that is core to symbolic behavior. Linguistic symbols, for example, are arbitrarily and symmetrically related to their referent such that the term banana has no resemblance to bananas but when processed can be used to discriminate bananas. Equally when bananas are perceived the term banana is readily produced. This relation is arguably the defining mark of symbolic representation. In this paper I shall detail the SE phenomenon and argue that it is evidence for a cognitive device that I term a General Symbol Machine (GSM). The GSM not only sets the background condition for subsequent linguistic evolution but also for other symbolic behaviors such as mathematical reasoning. In so doing the GSM is not particularly domain-specific. The apparent domain-specificity of, for example, natural language is a consequence of other computational developments. This introduces complexity to evolutionary arguments about cognitive architecture.

What can evolutionary psychology tell us about cognitive architecture?

Dickins, T.E.

Certain evolutionary psychologists have argued that a massively modular cognitive architecture is the necessary outcome of natural selection. This argument appears to be predicated upon three core and questionable assumptions — 1) a Classicist Computational Theory of Mind; 2) Marr’s (1982) tripartite explanatory project for the cognitive sciences; and 3) the view that adaptive behaviour must come under fairly direct cognitive control. This paper argues that, under these core assumptions, there is in fact no direct support for a modular architecture from an adaptationist analysis. This is because such analyses are always at the behavioural level and there is nothing in the behavioural data to help decide between possible architectures. Behavioural data can only be used to provide an extensional functional analysis and architectural claims are to some extent intensional. This leaves only an argument from theoretical cognitive science and this too is weak. The paper closes with a discussion about whether or not an evolutionary perspective can inform models of cognitive architecture at all and the conclusion is drawn that it can. Such an approach favours ground-up modelling of functions and thereby imposes a form of parsimony on algorithmic and architectural speculations.