The Savannah hypotheses: origin, reception and impact on paleoanthropology

The reconstruction of the human past is a complex task characterized by a high level of interdisciplinarity. How do scientists from different fields reach consensus on crucial aspects of paleoanthropological research? The present paper explores this question through an historical analysis of the origin, development, and reception of the savannah hypotheses (SHs). We show that this model neglected to investigate crucial biological aspects which appeared to be irrelevant in scenarios depicting early hominins evolving in arid or semi-arid open plains. For instance, the exploitation of aquatic food resources and other aspects of hominin interaction with water were largely ignored in classical paleoanthropology. These topics became central to alternative ideas on human evolution known as aquatic hypotheses. Since the aquatic model is commonly regarded as highly controversial, its rejection led to a stigmatization of the whole spectrum of topics around water use in non-human hominoids and hominins. We argue that this bias represents a serious hindrance to a comprehensive reconstruction of the human past. Progress in this field depends on clear differentiation between hypotheses proposed to contextualize early hominin evolution in specific environmental settings and research topics which demand the investigation of all relevant facets of early hominins' interaction with complex landscapes.

Early detection of psychosis: helpful or stigmatizing experience? A qualitative study

AIM Despite the large scientific debate concerning potential stigmatizing effects of identifying an individual as being in an at-risk mental state (ARMS) for psychosis, studies investigating this topic from the subjective perspective of patients are rare. This study assesses whether ARMS individuals experience stigmatization and to what extent being informed about the ARMS is experienced as helpful or harmful. METHODS Eleven ARMS individuals, currently participating in the follow-up assessments of the prospective Basel Früherkennung von Psychosen (FePsy; English: Early Detection of Psychosis) study, were interviewed in detail using a semistructured qualitative interview developed for this purpose. Data were analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. RESULTS Most individuals experiencing first symptoms reported sensing that there was 'something wrong with them' and felt in need of help. They were relieved that a specific term was assigned to their symptoms. The support received from the early detection centre was generally experienced as helpful. Many patients reported stigmatization and discrimination that appeared to be the result of altered behaviour and social withdrawal due to the prepsychotic symptoms they experienced prior to contact with the early detection clinic. CONCLUSIONS The results suggest that early detection services help individuals cope with symptoms and potential stigmatization rather than enhancing or causing the latter. More emphasis should be put on the subjective experiences of those concerned when debating the advantages and disadvantages of early detection with regard to stigma. There was no evidence for increased perceived stigma and discrimination as a result of receiving information about the ARMS.