Individuals behavioural science

The explanations and predictions of behavioural science therefore have wider margins of error than those which can be offered by engineers or doctors. Statements made about behaviour will usually be qualified by words such as probably or in general. Individual exceptions to the predictions will always occur. 

Behavioural science commonly works by developing models of particular aspects of human behaviour. These models are inevitably simplifications of real life, in order to make it comprehensible. The models are frequently analogies drawn from other branches of knowledge. They represent the brain as a telephone exchange or a computer, the eye as a camera, etc. Different behavioural scientists use different analogies. This, to some extent, explains why there sometimes appear to be parallel and incompatible theories about the same aspect of human behaviour. Analogies are powerful and useful, but they have limitations which must always be acknowledged. They can never be perfect descriptions of the way that an individual functions, and will be useful only within their limits. In the sections which... 

Because of its limitations behavioural science is dismissed by some as being no more than common sense dressed up in fancy language. All individuals must have some ability to explain and predict the behaviour of themselves and others, or they would not be able to function effectively in the world. However, most individuals explanations and predictions are often proved wrong. Behavioural science used in a systematic and rigorous way can always improve on unaided common sense. ... 

It starts off by positioning the individual in the process of development of accidents (section 2.7.2). Then it gives some basic ideas about what behavioural science can and cannot be expected to explain and predict (section 2.7.3). That section also introduces the idea of the individual as a... 

Most individuals explanations and predictions are, therefore, quite often proved wrong. Behavioural science used in a systematic and rigorous way can always improve on tmaided common sense. ... 

Figure 8.3 Reprinted from Individual Behaviour in the Control of Danger Hale, A.R. and Glendon, A.I., 1987, page 40 with permission from Elsevier Science...

From the science performed mainly over the last ten years it is obvious that the role of pectic substances in health care has been substantiated. For some of the pectic substances, parts of the structure of the bioactive sites have been determined, but further studies of the relevant structures for the individual active polymers must be performed in order to find a possible common structure for the activities observed. It also appears that there are special structural features present in some of the polymers, which are not foimd in others, and which are important for their activity, and this may explain the different behaviour of the polymers in the same system. 

Pheromones have been defined as substances released by an individual into the external environment which precipitate a particular reaction in a conspecific (Karlson and Liischer 1959). Pheromones are used by species in a variety of phyla (see e.g. McClintock, Jacob, Zelano and Hayreh 2001), and there exist many examples of pheromone-mediated behaviour in a wide range of mammals, particularly in relation to mating behaviour and maturation (see e.g. Vandenbergh 1983). In humans however, the question of whether pheromones influence behaviour was recently listed by Science magazine as one of the top 100 outstanding questions (Anon 2005). A recent review of behavioural and anatomical studies relating to the function of pheromones in human interactions concluded that while a small number were unambiguously supportive , none seemed ultimately conclusive (Hays 2003). 

This term subsumes all factors which reduce potential damage to health. These include protective measures promoted by the state, various authorized institutions and associations as well as by industry, science and the medical professions. Above all, however, every individual should assume personal responsibility for maintaining his or her state of health through appropriate behaviour. The media must also accept a vital role in this context ... 

A priori there is no reason to believe that any single model for individual-level behaviour will be the best in all cases of collective action. Explanatory pluralism should not be eschewed. On the other hand, one should beware of the dangers of ad ftoc-ness. I believe the best strategy for further research may be a mixed one, with about 70 per cent of the effort going into further exploration of macro-correlation and 30 per cent into the formulation of models that offer micro-foundations. Surely there is no problem in the social sciences that is more important than that of explaining why people cooperate. 

Of course, reactions between ions and oxides are important in contexts other than soil science. However, many studies have appeared in the soil science literature and these are not always well known by surface scientists. One of the purposes of this article is to bring some of these studies to attention. However the main purpose is to show how studies using simple materials such as samples of individual oxides may be used to understand behaviour of more complex materials such as soils. 

---