As the development of artificial intelligence continues at breakneck speed, questions about whether we understand what we are getting ourselves into persist. One fear is that increasingly intelligent robots will take all our jobs. Another fear is that we will create a world where a superintelligence will one day decide that it has no need for humans. This fear is well-explored in popular culture, through books and films like the Terminator series.

Another possibility is maybe the one that makes the most sense - since humans are the ones creating them, the machines and machine intelligences are likely to behave just like humans. For better or worse. DeepMind, Googles cutting-edge AI company, has shown just that.

The accomplishments of the DeepMind program so far include learning from its memory, mimicking human voices, writing music, and beating the best Go player in the world.

Recently, the DeepMind team ran a series of tests to investigate how the AI would respond when faced with certain social dilemmas. In particular, they wanted to find out whether the AI is more likely to cooperate or compete.

One of the tests involved 40 million instances of playing the computer game Gathering, during which DeepMind showed how far its willing to go to get what it wants. The game was chosen because it encapsulates aspects of the classic Prisoners Dilemma from game theory.

Pitting AI-controlled characters (called agents) against each other, DeepMind had them compete to gather the most virtual apples. Once the amount of available apples got low, the AI agents started to display "highly aggressive" tactics, employing laser beams to knock each other out. They would also steal the opponents apples.

Heres how one of those games played out:

The DeepMind AI agents are in blue and red. The apples are green, while the laser beams are yellow.

The DeepMind team described their test in a blog postthis way:

We let the agents play this game many thousands of times and let them learn how to behave rationally using deep multi-agent reinforcement learning. Rather naturally, when there are enough apples in the environment, the agents learn to peacefully coexist and collect as many apples as they can. However, as the number of apples is reduced, the agents learn that it may be better for them to tag the other agent to give themselves time on their own to collect the scarce apples.

Interestingly, what appears to have happened is that the AI systems began to develop some forms of human behavior.

This model... shows that some aspects of human-like behaviour emerge as a product of the environment and learning. Less aggressive policies emerge from learning in relatively abundant environments with less possibility for costly action.The greed motivation reflects the temptation to take out a rival and collect all the apples oneself, said Joel Z. Leibo from the DeepMind team to Wired.

Besides the fruit gathering, the AI was also tested via a Wolfpack hunting game. In it, two AI characters in the form of wolves chased a third AI agent - the prey. Here the researchers wanted to see if the AI characters would choose to cooperate to get the prey because they were rewarded for appearing near the prey together when it was being captured.

"The idea is that the prey is dangerous - a lone wolf can overcome it, but is at risk of losing the carcass to scavengers. However, when the two wolves capture the prey together, they can better protect the carcass from scavengers, and hence receive a higher reward, wrote the researchers in their paper.

Indeed, the incentivized cooperation strategy won out in this instance, with the AI choosing to work together.

This is how that test panned out:

The wolves are red, chasing the blue dot (prey), while avoiding grey obstacles.

If you are thinking Skynet is here, perhaps the silver lining is that the second test shows how AIs self-interest can include cooperation rather than the all-out competitiveness of the first test. Unless, of course, its cooperation to hunt down humans.

Here's a chart showing the results of the game tests that shows a clear increase in aggression during "Gathering":

Movies aside, the researchers are working to figure out how AI can eventually control complex multi-agent systems such as the economy, traffic systems, or the ecological health of our planet all of which depend on our continued cooperation.

One nearby AI implementation where this could be relevant - self-driving cars which will have to choose safest routes, while keeping the objectives of all the parties involved under consideration.

The warning from the tests is that if the objectives are not balanced out in the programming, the AI might act selfishly, probably not for everyones benefit.

Whats next for the DeepMind team? Joel Leibo wants the AI to go deeper into the motivations behind decision-making:

Going forward it would be interesting to equip agents with the ability to reason about other agents beliefs and goals, said Leibo to Bloomberg.

More here:
Google's AI Learns Betrayal and "Aggressive" Actions Pay Off | Big ... - Big Think

According to a new study, dogs judge humans too, especially when they are behaving rudely.

The human behavior has officially gained a new judge. According to a new study, dogs judge humans too, especially when they are behaving in an inappropriate manner.

Our canine friends are not the only ones to judge us. Another species of the animal world does so as well. Research confirmed the fact that primates judge our behavior.

And apparently, mans best friend does so too. Research on the matter was led by James Anderson. He is a comparative psychologist. Study results were released earlier this year. They were published in the Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews journal.

The study paper was titled as follows. Third-party social evaluations of humans by monkeys and dogs Initially, Anderson and his team started out by testing monkeys. More exactly, Capuchin ones.

Their initial experiment went as follows. An actor was asked to try and get a toy out of a box. A second actor was asked to respond in two ways to this event. At first, this second member helped open the box. But the other variant had the second actor completely ignoring the toy struggle.

At the same time, both actors were asked to offer food to the Capuchins. In the first scenario, the monkey accepted food from them both. But in the second case, they were more selective. The Capuchins took food from the actor struggling with the box. But they denied it when it was offered by the second actor, the unhelpful and rude one.

Tests also proved another fact. These monkeys also presented a sense of fairness and unfairness as well. This was shown through another test.

But the scientists also wanted to turn to another animal species. One that is closer to us. Which led to our canine friends. And also to a quite clear conclusion. Dogs judge humans based on their behavior.

They too were tested in a similar manner. But instead of using complete strangers, one study participant was their owner. They were also put in a struggling situation. More exactly, they were asked to try and open a container.

Two actors also joined the tests. And they were both presented with the box. Depending on the variant, one either accepted or declined to help. The other actor remained passive throughout both these scenarios.

As before, the actors were asked to offer them food. But this was no easy task. As the dogs judge humans too, they mostly did not accept any from the rude actor. Instead, they readily took food when the same participantwas helpful. The dogs response to the indifferent actor was somewhat neutral. Although they accepted the treats.

Just as with the monkeys, the dog tests showed the following. They too exhibit the ability to judge people based on their behavior. Essentially, they based their own response on the way the respective human acted.

Dogs were also noted to do the following. They seem to comprehend the differences between being rude or unpleasant and a helpful behavior. And they also seem to try and avoid the rude ones.

The tests, in general, pointed out an interesting fact. Both the monkeys and dogs recognized negativity. And also tried to shun it. As such, the researchers reached the following conclusion. These animals are socially aware of the behavior of both the humans and animals surrounding them.

As it is, you should remember this the next time someone asks for some help. Dogs judge humans and your canine friend may not be too happy if you deny it.

Image Source: Wikimedia

See original here:
Dogs Judge Humans When They Are Behaving Badly - Regal Tribune

Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 7 a.m.

As our own Cory Garcia will attest, one of the things I actually do get paid for when working here is arguing on social media. It turns out one of the best ways to track and study human behavior in the online space is, well, to engage with people whose impulse control is poor enough that they let their unfiltered personality dangle out in the wind. Its not the healthiest way to spend ones time, but it does help you learn an awful lot about how people think and act online.

Recently I had a bad Internet dust-up with a local artist who has been on my friends list for years and a rather constant headache regarding his behavior involving women and minorities on my page, and it finally resulted in an unfriending and finally a block because boundaries were never his jam or jelly.

One of the gaslight-ier things he said to me before the blocking was Id take a bullet for you. Ive seen others say that to people who were trying to get them to modify their behavior and I now consider it a very red flag. Someone who says this to you, especially when its in response to a friendship being on the line because he acted in a way you asked him not to, is probably not your friend.

First, to get it out of the way, almost none of us need bullets taken for us. The odds, even in America, of me being in a situation where anyone would even have the chance to stop a bullet to save me are very small. Im not the President. Im not even a Nazi with a punchable face and a stupid frog pin. Offering to be my bodyguard for the fictional assassins out to get me is just dumb.

But lets get into the nitty-gritty of what the statement Id take a bullet for you as an accusation that youre being a bad friend actually says. It implies, for one, that the world is a dangerous place, that you are beset on all sides by dangers, and that the person saying it is the one you can really trust. Thats the sort of thing domestic abusers say to their significant others to alienate them from their friends.

More than that, though, its an attempt to instill a sense of obligation in the listener despite the fact that the person saying it hasnt actually done anything to earn the obligation. Its a case of I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, an emotional debt against a future act of ultimate selflessness that will almost certainly never come to pass. By saying it first, the speaker implies that you wouldnt do this same heroic deed for him, or maybe you just havent thought about your friendship like he has.

If youre one of the people saying this sort of thing to friends youre having an argument over, you need to stop. It doesnt actually come out as a nice thing to say, even if youre sure you meant it. It definitely isnt a good way to stop an argument when the subject under discussion is your behavior right now, not in the possible future.

Like most people, I dont really need someone to take a bullet for me. I need people to stop calling women whores and cunts around me. I need a lot less queerphobia and transphobia in the world. I need folks to stop sharing every half-cocked conspiracy theory that proves they need a gun in an elementary school. These are actually helpful, and they require work and learning restraint, which is probably why jerks prefer to offer a pointless, manipulative and hollow martyrdom fantasy instead.

Read more here:
Advice: Never Trust Anyone That Tells You They'll Take a Bullet For You - Houston Press

In this game two agents, a red and a blue dot, have to gather green-dot apples.

Image: Google DeepMind/YouTube

Scientists at Google-owned DeepMind have found its AIs behave almost the way humans do when faced with scarce resources.

In a new study, DeepMind scientists plugged its AI agents, trained with deep reinforcement learning, into two multi-agent 2D games to model how conflict or cooperation emerges between selfish participants in a theoretical economy.

As DeepMind explains, they trained their AI agents to behave the way some economists model human decision making. That is, selfish and always rational.

"The research may enable us to better understand and control the behaviour of complex multi-agent systems such as the economy, traffic, and environmental challenges," DeepMind's researchers explain in a blog.

In one game two agents, a red and a blue dot, are faced with the task of gathering apples represented by green dots. The agents can simply collect apples together, suggesting cooperation, or they can 'tag' the other to prevent them collecting apples.

After several thousand rounds, they found that when there's an abundance of apples the agents collect as many as possible and leave each other alone. However, when DeepMind restricted the supply, the agents became more aggressive, figuring out that it may be optimal to block their rival to boost their chances of taking what's available.

"The Gathering game predicts that conflict may emerge from competition for scarce resources, but is less likely to emerge when resources are plentiful," they write in a new paper.

"These results show that agents learn aggressive policies in environments that combine a scarcity of resources with the possibility of costly action. Less aggressive policies emerge from learning in relatively abundant environments with less possibility for costly action," they note.

DeepMind also found that smarter agents with a larger network, enabling them to devise more complex strategies, tried to block their fellow gatherer more frequently, regardless of how much scarcity was introduced.

However, a second game called Wolfpack produced different behaviors when they were equipped to devise more complex strategies.

In this game, two wolves represented by red dots work together to capture the blue dot prey and face the risk of losing the carcass to scavengers.

If the wolves cooperate, they can get a higher reward since two wolves are better at protecting the catch than one. In this case, DeepMind found that a greater capacity to implement complex strategies resulted in more cooperation.

DeepMind found that in Wolfpack, cooperation behavior is more complex and requires a larger network size because agents need to coordinate hunting to collect team rewards.

Image: Google DeepMind/YouTube

They also found the wolves developed two different strategies for killing the prey and protecting the carcass.

"On the one hand, the wolves could cooperate by first finding one another and then moving together to hunt the prey, while on the other hand, a wolf could first find the prey and then wait for the other wolf to arrive before capturing it," they note in the paper.

DeepMind offers this explanation for why network size made the agents more competitive in the gathering game, yet more cooperative in the hunting game.

"In Gathering, defection behavior is more complex and requires a larger network size to learn than cooperative behavior. This is the case because defection requires the difficult task of targeting the opposing agent with the beam whereas peacefully collecting apples is almost independent of the opposing agent's behavior," they write.

"In Wolfpack, cooperation behavior is more complex and requires a larger network size because the agents need to coordinate their hunting behaviors to collect the team reward, whereas the lone-wolf behavior does not require coordination with the other agent and hence requires less network capacity," they write.

Read the original post:
Google's DeepMind: What can these battling AIs tell us about human behavior? - ZDNet

As part of their series on mobility, Deloitte explored how human behavior can cause delays in the adoption of new technology in the article Framing the future of mobility: Using behavioral economics to accelerate consumer adoption. Deloitte has predicted a shift in the automotive industry from personally owned, driver-driven cars to shared and self-driving vehicles. Despite the number of advantages generated from such a transformation, it could be met with skepticism because of limitations in our own human cognition.

Deloitte argues that the speed with which this future vision arrives likely hinges...on how quickly consumer expectations and behavior shift. The same research that revealed these change-prohibitive biases shed light on ways to overcome them and encourage consumers to welcome the future of mobility.

If/when the automotive shift that Deloitte anticipates comes to fruition, its not just the auto industry that will be majorly affected, but insurance, financing, technology, and energy industries as well. This isnt simply a change in how people use transportation, but one affecting government regulations and producing major infrastructure changes.

As ridesharing and self-driving transportation options become more prevalent, consumers of all ages could potentially benefit. The previously immobile generations who can not yet drive or are now unable to would no longer find themselves stranded, and families wouldnt have to worry about transporting them. Other societal benefits could result, like a decrease in traffic congestion and an increase in vehicle efficiency; resulting in reduced emissions and improved air quality.

Most importantly, autonomous vehicles would likely eliminate the element of human error, helping reduce the 30,000 deaths that occur each year during traffic accidents. A safer and more productive commutean average of 46 minutes per daycould reduce stress and be more affordable; Deloitte analysis shows that the cost of traveling per mile might decrease as much as two-thirds.

The positive results of an autonomous driving world could likely be abundant, but Deloitte cautions that just because a new technology offers benefits on paper does not mean customers will ultimately embrace it.

Continue Reading Below

ADVERTISEMENT

Studies in behavioral economics and social psychology have demonstrated that we as humans have a set of biases that affect the choices we make. Figure 1 in the article shows a list of these biases and their impact on how the future of mobility would be adoptedor, more specifically, why these biases could likely hinder the adoption of autonomous vehicles.

A loss aversion bias causes humans to overrate what we would lose compared to what we would gain from something new. This goes along with the endowment effect, where we overvalue things we already possess, and a status quo bias: a reluctance to change because we overvalue the current state.

These three biases together could cause individuals to feel like they are giving up more with their personally owned car than they would gain from a new autonomous driving state. To justify a change, the gain must overwhelm what is being giving up, so these biases make it even harder to achieve when you factor in the emotional attachment to a car. Trading a tangible good for a service also doesnt feel like a fair trade, so substituting personally owned vehicles for car/ridesharing may take longer than Deloittes initial time projections.

Three other types of biases related to risk would also predispose humans to resisting the change to a future mobility with autonomous driving. There is a risk miscalculation bias at play, which shows that humans are generally poor at assessing risk and assume the worst when faced with something new or unknown. In the instance of this new technology, there are no known effects as to how driverless vehicles will work, so it is perceived as more risky than it actually is.

The chart in figure 2 shows that the types of risk categorized as new, unknown, uncontrollable, involuntaryall of which would be associated with self-driving carsare viewed as the most risky. Regardless of the testing done by regulators or carmakers, the underlying technology of a self-driving car will likely remain mysterious to the average consumer. [T]he very nature of an autonomous vehicle makes it fundamentally uncontrollable (by the passenger, at least), which means customers are likely to see riding in them as particularly risky.

Likewise, an experience that can be controlled is an old risk, or is a known and observable technology that would automatically be viewed as less risky by the human brain. This is reflected in the optimism bias, where drivers overestimate their own ability and underestimate the probability of a bad event happening to them. Most drivers think they are better than the average driver and safer than they really are, which could reduce the likelihood that consumers will adopt self-driving cars due to safety reasons; they surely believe they are safer than trusting an unknown technology.

Another cognitive bias working against a future mobility system is the tendency to overemphasize a familiar or signature event that sticks out as the norm even though it may be an outlier. If a specific airline has a crash, people may easily associate that airline with crashing planes even though it may be a statistical anomaly and extremely rare. This tendency, known as the availability heuristic, might make a commuter focus on the few occasions when he was inconvenienced by ridesharing (by a long wait for his vehicle, for example) or a story of someone being harassed by a driver rather than the majority of instances when shared mobility was fast, convenient, and inexpensive.

After stepping into the psyche to see why we are predisposed to thinking in a certain way, Deloitte offers steps leaders can take to facilitate an accelerate adoption of autonomous driving technology. By manipulating the way a choice is presented or framed, we can overcome the aforementioned cognitive barriers.

Negative framing Using the loss aversion bias, we know losses are seen with more importance than gains. This method would involve making a consumer feel like they are missing out on something instead of gaining something. So a choice framed as costing time/money/lives instead of saving them would be more effective.

Aggregating When presenting data, expanding timeframes and aggregating costs over the longer period has more impact. Showing the amount of time or money that can be saved in a year seems a lot larger than the minutes or pennies from each day, so by changing the timeframe and forcing the consumer to look at the bigger picture can have a greater influence.

Creating social proofs Deloitte points out that we often look to the behavior of others for clues as to the correct course of action. As juvenile as it may sound, the saying everyone is doing it really does come into play here. By making it seem like our peers are participating, we are more likely to as well; especially in the case of a product that a consumer doesnt feel strongly about one way or another.

Using default options Pre-selected options give the illusion that something is the norm, so by making an option the standard selection, a consumer will be influenced to use it. Making an autonomous vehicle the default option could encourage consumers to use that technology like Uber does with the UberPool feature.

Packaging as an add-on According to Deloitte, research suggests that any new innovation is more readily accepted by consumers when it is packaged as an add-on to an existing, familiar item, rather than as a change to the central form and function of a product. By creating a familiar vehicle that has autonomous driving capabilities as an additional feature, it would mitigate the new-ness of such a technology and make it seem more acceptable.

How quickly the future of mobility takes hold in our society depends on a large number of factors; chief among them is the way it is marketed. By understanding the cognitive biases behind how consumers will perceive autonomous vehicles, decision-makers can alter their approach to make it more appealing and reduce the fear and hesitance that typically comes along with change.

More:
The Skeptical Consumer - How Behavioral Economics Can Influence the Adoption of Self-Driving Cars - Fox Business

Most of us read the wrong things. As Haruki Murakami put it, reading what everyone else reads means youre probably going to think what everyone else thinks. All those books from high-school? Everyone else has read them too. The best-sellers? Same.

Thats not to say these books arent valuable. They are. Theyre just not going to help you get unique insights, see problems in a different way than others, or even help you solve more problems. They will, however, make you sound like youre smart because you can talk about the things everyone else is talking about. That said, there is the old adage: When you do what everyone else is doing, you shouldnt be surprised to get the same results everyone else gets.

While thinking the thoughts that other people have is enough to get a seat at the table, its not enough to win the game.

To win you need to see things that other people cant see. You need to connect things that other people cant connect.

Reading can help you develop insights, connections, and understanding that baffles others. To do this, you cant, however, follow in the same footsteps as everyone else because that leads you down the same path.

With that in mind, here are five books that youve probably never heard of (and one you have) that will change your life and enable you to see the world in a new light.

La Rochefoucaulds critical and pithy analysis of human behavior wont soon be forgotten. A list of people influenced by his maxims include Nietzsche, Voltaire, Proust, de Gaulle, and Conan Doyle. The readers best policy, Rochefoucauld suggests, is to assume that none of these maxims is directed at him, and that he is the sole exception. . After that, I guarantee that he will be the first to subscribe to them.

Ive never read this book in a cover-to-cover sense but Ive read each of the laws. More than that, Ive broken each of the laws. Ill give you an example. The first law is Never outshine the master. Once, I worked directly for a CEO. I worked as hard as I ever have to show off my talents and skills and at every turn it backfired over and over again. The lessonmake your masters appear more brilliant than they are and you will attain the heights of power. I wish I read this book earlier in my career, it certainly would have been helpful.

This book sat on my shelf for a year before I picked it up recently. This is the biography of Cyrus the Great, also known as Cyrus the Elder, who made the oldest known declaration of human rights. The book is full of leadership lessons. Heres an example.

Brevity is the soul of command. Too much talking suggests desperation on the part of the leader. Speak shortly, decisively, and to the pointand couch your desires in such natural logic that no one can raise objections. Then move on.

This no-nonsense collection of 20 letters from a self-made man to his son are nothing short of brilliant as far as Im concerned. This is a great example of timeless wisdom. The broad theme is how to raise your children in a world where they have plentybut the lessons apply to parents and non-parents alike. Check out a sample.

An autobiography of Nobel laureate Herbert A. Simon, a remarkable polymath who more people should know about. In an age of increasing specializing, hes a rare generalistapplying what he learned as a scientist to other aspects of his life. Crossing disciplines, he was at the intersection of information sciences. He won the Nobel for his theory of bounded rationality, and is perhaps best known for his insightful quote, A wealth of information creates a poverty of attention.

And heres one more just for good luck, even if youve probably heard of it:

OK, this is a bonus pick as I figured many of you might have read this already. However, the translation matters. Get this one. The best way to sum up this book is: A simple and powerful guide to life. This book was never intended for publicationit was for himself. How many people write a book of epigrams to themselves during a war? Get it. Read it. Live it.

This post originally appeared on Medium.

Read the original here:
Five books about human behavior that will change the way you see ... - Quartz

Download and Export 0 checked results

This issue is In Progress but contains articles that are final and fully citable.

Test the joint effects of subconscious and conscious goals during skill acquisition.

Subconscious achievement goals increase time devoted to skill acquisition.

Subconscious achievement goals increase task performance.

Subconscious underachievement goals cause individuals to abandon goal pursuit.

Difficult conscious goals moderate these effects.

A hierarchical information structure (HIS) organizes information by categories.

A flat information structure (FIS) is an information set without categories.

Scholars have advocated HIS due to its efficiency benefits.

For creativity, HIS is detrimental because it reduces cognitive flexibility.

FIS increases creativity because it enhances flexible uses of information.

See the rest here:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes ...

Human behavior refers to the array of every physical action and observable emotion associated with individuals, as well as the human race as a whole. While specific traits of one's personality and temperament may be more consistent, other behaviors will change as one moves from birth through adulthood. In addition to being dictated by age and genetics, behavior, driven in part by thoughts and feelings, is an insight into individual psyche, revealing among other things attitudes and values. Social behavior, a subset of human behavior, study the considerable influence of social interaction and culture. Additional influences include ethics, encircling, authority, rapport, hypnosis, persuasion and coercion.

The behavior of humans (and other organisms or even mechanisms) falls within a range with some behavior being common, some unusual, some acceptable, and some outside acceptable limits. In sociology, behavior in general includes actions having no meaning, being not directed at other people, and thus all basic human actions. Behavior in this general sense should not be mistaken with social behavior, which is a more advanced social action, specifically directed at other people. The acceptability of behavior depends heavily upon social norms and is regulated by various means of social control. Human behavior is studied by the specialized academic disciplines of psychiatry, psychology, social work, sociology, economics, and anthropology.

Human behavior is experienced throughout an individuals entire lifetime. It includes the way they act based on different factors such as genetics, social norms, core faith, and attitude. Behavior is impacted by certain traits each individual has. The traits vary from person to person and can produce different actions or behavior from each person. Social norms also impact behavior. Due to the inherently conformist nature of human society in general, humans are pressured into following certain rules and displaying certain behaviors in society, which conditions the way people behave. Different behaviors are deemed to be either acceptable or unacceptable in different societies and cultures. Core faith can be perceived through the religion and philosophy of that individual. It shapes the way a person thinks and this in turn results in different human behaviors. Attitude can be defined as "the degree to which the person has a favorable or unfavorable evaluation of the behavior in question."[1] One's attitude is essentially a reflection of the behavior he or she will portray in specific situations. Thus, human behavior is greatly influenced by the attitudes we use on a daily basis.

Long before Charles Darwin published his book On the Origin of Species in 1859, animal breeders knew that patterns of behavior are somehow influenced by inheritance from parents. Studies of identical twins as compared to less closely related human beings, and of children brought up in adoptive homes, have helped scientists understand the influence of genetics on human behavior. The study of human behavioral genetics is still developing steadily with new methods such as genome-wide association studies.[2]

Social norms, the often-unspoken rules of a group, shape not just our behaviors but also our attitudes. An individuals behavior varies depending on the group(s) they are a part of, a characteristic of society that allows to norms heavily impact society. Without social norms, human society would not function as it currently does; humans would have to be more abstract in their behavior, as there would not be a pre-tested 'normal' standardized lifestyle, and individuals would have to make many more choices for themselves. The institutionalization of norms is, however, inherent in human society perhaps as a direct result of the desire to be accepted by others, which leads humans to manipulate their own behavior in order to 'fit in' with others. Depending on their nature and upon one's perspective, norms can impact different sections of society both positively (e.g. eating, dressing warm in the winter) and negatively (e.g. racism, drug use).

Creativity is assumed to be present within every individual.[3] Without creative minds, we would not live in a modern world like today. Creativity pushes people past their comfort zone. For example, the Wright Brothers' invention of the first practical fixed-wing aircraft. The aircraft first took flight in 1903, and fifty years later the first passenger jet airliner was introduced. Creativity is what defines human beings. Creativity has kept people alive during harsh conditions, and it has also made certain individuals wealthy. We use creativity in our daily lives as well, such as finding a shortcut to a destination.

Another important aspect of human behavior is their core faith. This faith can be manifested in the forms of religion, philosophy, culture, and/or personal belief and often affects the way a person can behave. 80% of the United States public claims some sort of belief in a higher power, which makes religion a large importance in society.[4] It is only natural for something that plays such a large role in society to have an effect on human behavior.[5]Morals are another factor of core faith that affects the way a person behaves. Emotions connected to morals including shame, pride, and discomfort and these can change the way a person acts. Most importantly, shame and guilt have a large impact on behavior.[6] Lastly, culture highly affects human behavior. The beliefs of certain cultures are taught to children from such a young age that they are greatly affected as they grow up. These beliefs are taken into consideration throughout daily life, which leads to people from different cultures acting differently. These differences are able to alter the way different cultures and areas of the world interact and act.[7]

An attitude is an expression of favor or disfavor toward a person, place, thing, or event.[8] The interesting thing about an attitude and human beings is that it alters between each individual. Everyone has a different attitude towards different things. A main factor that determines attitude is likes and dislikes. The more one likes something or someone the more one is willing to open up and accept what they have to offer. When one doesnt like something, one is more likely to get defensive and shut down. An example of how one's attitude affects one's human behavior could be as simple as taking a child to the park or to the doctor. Children know they have fun at the park so their attitude becomes willing and positive, but when a doctor is mentioned, they shut down and become upset with the thought of pain. Attitudes can sculpt personalities and the way people view who we are. People with similar attitudes tend to stick together as interests and hobbies are common. This does not mean that people with different attitudes do not interact, the fact is they do. What it means is that specific attitudes can bring people together (e.g., religious groups). Attitudes have a lot to do with the mind which highly relates to human behavior. The way a human behaves depends a lot on how they look at the situation and what they expect to gain from it.[9] Positive attitudes are better than negative ones as negativity can bring on negative emotions that most of the time can be avoided. It is up to humans to make sure their attitudes positively reflect the behaviors they want to show. This can be done by assessing their attitudes and properly presenting them in society.

Different Types of Behaviors

There are, in fact, 5 main types of human behavior. In the article My PTSD, it mentions these 5 types of human behavior: passive, aggressive, assertive, passive-aggressive, and the alternator.[10] According to Oxford Dictionaries, to be passive is Accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance: the women were portrayed as passive victims.[11] For example, a person who cant say no to anybody, are being passive.In My PTSD, also describes a person being passive as a doormat and that a passive person fears being rejected or failing others.[12] Like a person trying to fit in with the cool kids. The person does anything and everything, so long as they accept them as their own, or at least make it seem like it. To be aggressive, is to feel powerful. A person who shows passive behavior insists to have control on others. In actuality, a passive person feels helpless, fearful, and abused (My PTSD).[13] Its almost reverse psychology. My PTSD describes passive-aggressive style as all about harboring and bottling your emotions, the person is usually full of anger, yet will mask it with a smile, then when your back is turned, somehow find a way to insult you or create concern for you, without directly being able to be identified and held accountable.[14] An alternator is someone who constantly alternates between aggression and passiveness. The difference between passive-aggressive and alternator, is when passive and aggression is used. Alternator, is self-explanatory, the person alternates the between the two. Passive-aggression is when both are done in the same time. Assertiveness is none of the above. The article Assertiveness- An Introduction, puts it as standing up for your personal rights - expressing thoughts, feelings and beliefs in direct, honest and appropriate ways.[15] Its about sticking up for yourself. A key point is assertive people always respect the thoughts, feelings and beliefs of other people as well as their own (Assertiveness).[16] If you are not respectful of others opinions, then you are considered an aggressive person.

View original post here:
Human behavior - Wikipedia

Instinct or innate behavior is the inherent inclination of a living organism towards a particular complex behavior. The simplest example of an instinctive behavior is a fixed action pattern (FAP), in which a very short to medium length sequence of actions, without variation, are carried out in response to a clearly defined stimulus.

Any behavior is instinctive if it is performed without being based upon prior experience (that is, in the absence of learning), and is therefore an expression of innate biological factors. Sea turtles, newly hatched on a beach, will automatically move toward the ocean. A kangaroo climbs into its mother's pouch upon being born. Honeybees communicate by dancing in the direction of a food source without formal instruction. Other examples include animal fighting, animal courtship behavior, internal escape functions, and the building of nests.

Instincts are inborn complex patterns of behavior that exist in most members of the species, and should be distinguished from reflexes, which are simple responses of an organism to a specific stimulus, such as the contraction of the pupil in response to bright light or the spasmodic movement of the lower leg when the knee is tapped. The absence of volitional capacity must not be confused with an inability to modify fixed action patterns. For example, people may be able to modify a stimulated fixed action pattern by consciously recognizing the point of its activation and simply stop doing it, whereas animals without a sufficiently strong volitional capacity may not be able to disengage from their fixed action patterns, once activated.[1]

The role of instincts in determining the behavior of animals varies from species to species. The more complex the neural system of an animal, the greater is the role of the cerebral cortex and social learning, and instincts play a lesser role. A comparison between a crocodile and an elephant illustrates how mammals for example are heavily dependent on social learning. Lionesses and chimpanzees raised in zoos away from their birth mothers most often reject their own offspring because they have not been taught the skills of mothering.[citation needed] Such is not the case with simpler species such as reptiles.

In everyday speech, the word instinct is often used to refer to intuition or even clairvoyance.

Jean Henri Fabre, an entomologist, considered instinct to be any behavior which did not require cognition or consciousness to perform. Fabre's inspiration was his intense study of insects, some of whose behaviors he wrongly considered fixed and not subject to environmental influence.[2]

Instinct as a concept fell out of favor in the 1920s with the rise of behaviorism and such thinkers as B. F. Skinner, which held that most significant behavior is learned. These beliefs, like Fabre's belief that most behaviors were simply reflexive, also proved to be too simplistic to account for the complex emotional and social behavior of human beings.

An interest in innate behaviors arose again in the 1950s with Konrad Lorenz and Nikolaas Tinbergen, who made the distinction between instinct and learned behaviors. Our modern understanding of instinctual behavior in animals owes much to their work. For instance, there exists a sensitive period for a bird in which it learns the identity of its mother. Konrad Lorenz famously had a goose imprint on his boots. Thereafter the goose would follow whoever wore the boots. The identity of the goose's mother was learned, but the goose's behavior towards the boots was instinctive.[citation needed]

The term "instinct" in psychology was first used in the 1870s by Wilhelm Wundt. By the close of the 19th century, most repeated behavior was considered instinctual. In a survey of the literature at that time, one researcher chronicled 4,000 human "instincts," having applied this label to any behavior that was repetitive.[citation needed] As research became more rigorous and terms better defined, instinct as an explanation for human behavior became less common. In a conference in 1960, chaired by Frank Beach, a pioneer in comparative psychology, and attended by luminaries in the field, the term was restricted in its application.[citation needed] During the 1960s and 1970s, textbooks still contained some discussion of instincts in reference to human behavior. By the year 2000, a survey of the 12 best selling textbooks in Introductory Psychology revealed only one reference to instincts, and that was in regard to Sigmund Freud's referral to the "id" instincts.[citation needed]. In this sense, instincts appeared to have become regarded as increasingly superfluous in trying to understand human psychological behavior.

Psychologist Abraham Maslow argued that humans no longer have instincts because we have the ability to override them in certain situations. He felt that what is called instinct is often imprecisely defined, and really amounts to strong drives. For Maslow, an instinct is something which cannot be overridden, and therefore while the term may have applied to humans in the past, it no longer does.[3]

The book Instinct (1961) established a number of criteria which distinguish instinctual from other kinds of behavior. To be considered instinctual, a behavior must: a) be automatic, b) be irresistible, c) occur at some point in development, d) be triggered by some event in the environment, e) occur in every member of the species, f) be unmodifiable, and g) govern behavior for which the organism needs no training (although the organism may profit from experience and to that degree the behavior is modifiable).[4]

In a classic paper published in 1972,[5] the psychologist Richard Herrnstein decries Fabre's opinions on instinct (see: In biology section).

In Information behavior: An Evolutionary Instinct (2010, pp.3542), Amanda Spink notes that "currently in the behavioral sciences instinct is generally understood as the innate part of behavior that emerges without any training or education in humans." She claims that the viewpoint that information behavior has an instinctive basis is grounded in the latest thinking on human behavior. Furthermore, she notes that "behaviors such as cooperation, sexual behavior, child rearing and aesthetics are [also] seen as 'evolved psychological mechanisms' with an instinctive basis."[6][7][8] Spink adds that Steven Pinker similarly asserts that language acquisition is instinctive in humans in his book The Language Instinct (1994).

Examples of behaviors that do not require conscious will include many reflexes. The stimulus in a reflex may not require brain activity but instead may travel to the spinal cord as a message that is then transmitted back through the body, tracing a path called the reflex arc. Reflexes are similar to fixed action patterns in that most reflexes meet the criteria of a FAP. However, a fixed action pattern can be processed in the brain as well; a male stickleback's instinctive aggression towards anything red during his mating season is such an example. Examples of instinctive behaviors in humans include many of the primitive reflexes, such as rooting and suckling, behaviors which are present in mammals. In rats, it has been observed that innate responses are related to specific chemicals, and these chemicals are detected by two organs located in the nose: the vomeronasal organ (VNO) and the main olfactory epithelium (MOE).[9]

Some instinctive behaviors depend on maturational processes to appear. For instance, we commonly refer to birds "learning" to fly. However, young birds have been experimentally reared in devices that prevent them from moving their wings until they reached the age at which their cohorts were flying. These birds flew immediately and normally when released, showing that their improvement resulted from neuromuscular maturation and not true learning.[10]

An example of instinct is imprinting[according to whom?]. This is a complex response that involves visual, auditory, and olfactory cues in the environment surrounding an organism. In some cases, imprinting attaches an offspring to its parent, which is a reproductive benefit to offspring survival.[11] If an offspring has attachment to a parent, it is more likely to stay nearby under parental protection. Attached offspring are also more likely to learn from a parental figure when interacting that closely. Reproductive benefits are a driving force behind natural selection.

Environment is an important factor in how innate behavior has evolved. A hypothesis of Michael McCollough, a positive psychologist, explains that environment plays a key role in human behaviors such as forgiveness and revenge. This hypothesis theorizes that various social environments cause either forgiveness or revenge to be prevalent. McCollough relates his theory to game theory.[12] In a tit-for-tat strategy, cooperation and retaliation are comparable to forgiveness and revenge. The choice between the two can be beneficial or detrimental depending on what the partner organism chooses. Though this psychological example of game theory does not have as directly measurable results, it provides an interesting theory of unique thought. From a more biological standpoint, the limbic system is the main control area for response to certain stimuli, which includes a variety of instinctual behavior. The limbic system processes external stimuli related to emotions, social activity, and motivation, which propagates a behavioral response. Some behaviors include maternal care, aggression, defense, and social hierarchy. These behaviors are influenced by sensory inputsight, sound, touch, and smell.

Within the circuitry of the limbic system, there are various places where evolution could have taken place, or could take place in the future. For example, many rodents have receptors in the vomeronasal organ that are explicitly for predator stimuli that specifically relate to that individual species of rodent. The reception of a predatory stimulus usually creates a response of defense or fear.[13] Mating in rats follows a similar mechanism. The vomeronasal organ and the main olfactory epithelium, together called the olfactory system, detect pheromones from the opposite sex. These signals are then sent to the medial amygdala, which disperses the signal to a variety of brain parts. The pathways involved with innate circuitry are extremely specialized and specific.[14] Various organs and sensory receptors are involved in this complex process.

Instinct is a phenomenon that can be investigated from a multitude of angles: genetics, limbic system, nervous pathways, and environment. There are levels of instincts from molecular to groups of individuals that can be studied as well. Extremely specialized systems have evolved to create individuals who exhibit behaviors without learning them. Innate behavior is an important and interesting aspect of the biological world that people come into contact with every day.

Read the original:
Instinct - Wikipedia

This article is about sexual practices and related social aspects. For broader aspects of sexual behaviour, see Human sexuality. "Sexual activity" and "sexual behavior" redirect here. For sexual activity among other animals, see Animal sexual behaviour.

Human sexual activity, human sexual practice or human sexual behavior is the manner in which humans experience and express their sexuality. People engage in a variety of sexual acts, ranging from activities done alone (e.g., masturbation) to acts with another person (e.g., sexual intercourse, non-penetrative sex, oral sex, etc.) in varying patterns of frequency, for a wide variety of reasons. Sexual activity normally results in sexual arousal and physiological changes in the aroused person, some of which are pronounced while others are more subtle. Sexual activity may also include conduct and activities which are intended to arouse the sexual interest of another or enhance the sex life of another, such as strategies to find or attract partners (courtship and display behavior), or personal interactions between individuals (for instance, foreplay or BDSM). Sexual activity may follow sexual arousal.

Human sexual activity has sociological, cognitive, emotional, behavioral and biological aspects; these include personal bonding, sharing emotions and the physiology of the reproductive system, sex drive, sexual intercourse and sexual behavior in all its forms.

In some cultures, sexual activity is considered acceptable only within marriage, while premarital and extramarital sex are taboo. Some sexual activities are illegal either universally or in some countries or subnational jurisdictions, while some are considered contrary to the norms of certain societies or cultures. Two examples that are criminal offenses in most jurisdictions are sexual assault and sexual activity with a person below the local age of consent.

Sexual activity can be classified in a number of ways. It can be divided into acts which involve one person, also called autoeroticism, such as masturbation, or two or more people such as vaginal sex, anal sex, oral sex or mutual masturbation. If there are more than two participants in the sex act, it may be referred to as group sex. Autoerotic sexual activity can involve use of dildos, vibrators, anal beads, and other sex toys, though these devices can also be used with a partner.

Sexual activity can be classified into the gender and sexual orientation of the participants, as well as by the relationship of the participants. For example, the relationships can be ones of marriage, intimate partners, casual sex partners or anonymous. Sexual activity can be regarded as conventional or as alternative, involving, for example, fetishism, paraphilia, or BDSM activities.[1][2] Fetishism can take many forms ranging from the desire for certain body parts, for example large breasts, armpits or foot worship. The object of desire can often be shoes, boots, lingerie, clothing, leather or rubber items. Some non-conventional autoerotic practices can be dangerous. These include erotic asphyxiation and self-bondage. The potential for injury or even death that exists while engaging in the partnered versions of these fetishes (choking and bondage, respectively) becomes drastically increased in the autoerotic case due to the isolation and lack of assistance in the event of a problem.

Sexual activity can be consensual, which means that both or all participants agree to take part and are of the age that they can consent, or it may take place under force or duress, which is often called sexual assault or rape. In different cultures and countries, various sexual activities may be lawful or illegal in regards to the age, gender, marital status or other factors of the participants, or otherwise contrary to social norms or generally accepted sexual morals.

The physiological responses during sexual stimulation are fairly similar for both men and women and there are four phases.[3]

Sexual dysfunction is the inability to react emotionally or physically to sexual stimulation in a way projected of the average healthy person; it can affect different stages in the sexual response cycles, which are desire, excitement and orgasm.[7] In the media, sexual dysfunction is often associated with men, but in actuality, it is more commonly observed in females (43 percent) than males (31 percent).[8]

Sexual activity can lower blood pressure and overall stress levels, regardless of age.[citation needed] It releases tension, elevates mood, and may create a profound sense of relaxation, especially in the postcoital period. From a biochemical perspective, sex causes the release of endorphins and increases levels of white blood cells that actually boost the immune system. A study published in the journal Biological Psychology described how men who had had sex the previous night responded better to stressful situations, it suggested that if a person is regularly sexual, theyre regularly relaxed, and when the person is relaxed, they cope better with stressful situations.[citation needed] A 2007 study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior 36, (no. 3 (June 2007): 35768) reported that sexual behavior with a partner on one day significantly predicted lower negative mood and stress, and higher positive mood, on the following day.

People engage in sexual activity for any of a multitude of possible reasons. Although the primary evolutionary purpose of sexual activity is reproduction, research on college students suggested that people have sex for four general reasons: physical attraction, as a means to an end, to increase emotional connection, and to alleviate insecurity.[9]

Most people engage in sexual activity because of pleasure they derive from the arousal of their sexuality, especially if they can achieve orgasm. Sexual arousal can also be experienced from foreplay and flirting, and from fetish or BDSM activities,[1][10] or other erotic activities. Most commonly, people engage in sexual activity because of the sexual desire generated by a person to whom they feel sexual attraction; but they may engage in sexual activity for the physical satisfaction they achieve in the absence of attraction for another, as in the case of casual or social sex.[11] At times, a person may engage in a sexual activity solely for the sexual pleasure of their partner, such as because of an obligation they may have to the partner or because of love, sympathy or pity they may feel for the partner.

A person may engage in sexual activity for purely monetary considerations, or to obtain some advantage from either the partner or the activity. A man and woman may engage in sexual intercourse with the objective of conception. Some people engage in hate sex, which occurs between two people who strongly dislike or annoy each other. It is related to the idea that opposition between two people can heighten sexual tension, attraction and interest.[12]

It has been shown that sexual activity plays a large part in the interaction of social species. Joan Roughgarden, in her book Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People, postulates that this applies equally to humans as it does to other social species. She explores the purpose of sexual activity and demonstrates that there are many functions facilitated by such activity including pair bonding, group bonding, dispute resolution and reproduction.[13]

Research has found that people also engage in sexual activity for reasons associated with self-determination theory. The self-determination theory can be applied to a sexual relationship when the participants have positive feelings associated with the relationship. These participants do not feel guilty or coerced into the partnership.[14] Researchers have proposed the model of self-determined sexual motivation. The purpose of this model is to connect self-determination and sexual motivation.[15] This model has helped to explain how people are sexually motivated when involved in self-determined dating relationships. This model also links the positive outcomes, (satisfying the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness) gained from sexual motivations.[15]

According to the completed research associated with this model, it was found that people of both sexes who engaged in sexual activity for self-determined motivation had more positive psychological well-being.[15] While engaging in sexual activity for self-determined reasons, the participants also had a higher need for fulfillment. When this need was satisfied, they felt better about themselves. This was correlated with greater closeness to their partner and higher overall satisfaction in their relationship.[15] Though both sexes engaged in sexual activity for self-determined reasons, there were some differences found between males and females. It was concluded that females had more motivation than males to engage in sexual activity for self-determined reasons.[15] Females also had higher satisfaction and relationship quality than males did from the sexual activity.[15] Overall, research concluded that psychological well-being, sexual motivation, and sexual satisfaction were all positively correlated when dating couples partook in sexual activity for self-determined reasons.[15]

The frequency of sexual activity might range from zero (sexual abstinence) to 15 or 20 times a week.[16] In the United States, the average frequency of sexual intercourse for married couples is 2 to 3 times a week.[17] It is generally recognized that postmenopausal women experience declines in frequency of sexual intercourse[18] and that average frequency of intercourse declines with age. According to the Kinsey Institute, the average frequency of sexual intercourse in the US is 112 times per year (age 1829), 86 times per year (age 3039), and 69 times per year (age 4049).[19]

The age at which adolescents tend to become sexually active varies considerably between different cultures and from time to time. (See Prevalence of virginity.) The first sexual act of a child or adolescent is sometimes referred to as the sexualization of the child, and may be considered as a milestone or a change of status, as the loss of virginity or innocence. Youth are legally free to have intercourse after they reach the age of consent.

A 1999 survey of students indicated that approximately 40% of ninth graders across the United States report having had sexual intercourse. This figure rises with each grade. Males are more sexually active than females at each of the grade levels surveyed. Sexual activity of young adolescents differs in ethnicity as well. A higher percent of African American and Hispanic adolescents are sexually active than White adolescents.[20]

Research on sexual frequency has also been conducted solely on female adolescents who engage in sexual activity. Female adolescents tended to engage in more sexual activity due to positive mood. In female teenagers, engaging in sexual activity was directly positively correlated with being older, greater sexual activity in the previous week or prior day, and more positive mood the previous day or the same day as the sexual activity occurred.[21] Decreased sexual activity was associated with prior or current day negative mood or vaginal bleeding.[21]

Although opinions differ, others[who?] suggest that sexual activity is an essential part of humans, and that teenagers need to experience sex. Sexual experiences help teenagers understand pleasure and satisfaction.[22] In relation to hedonic and eudaimonic well-being, teenagers can positively benefit from sexual activity according to one particular research study. In the United States[which?] of America, a cross-sectional study of teenagers was completed.[when?] Teenagers who had their first sexual experience at age 16 revealed a higher well-being than those who were sexually inexperienced or who were first sexually active at a later age of 17.[22] Furthermore, teenagers who had their first sexual experience at age 15 or younger, or who had many sexual partners were not negatively affected and did not have associated lower well-being.[22]

Sexual activity is a normal physiological function,[23] but like other physical activity, it comes with risks. There are four main types of risks that may arise from sexual activity: unwanted pregnancy, contracting a sexually transmitted infection (STI/STD), physical injury, and psychological injury.

Any sexual activity that involves the introduction of semen into a woman's vagina, such as during sexual intercourse, or even contact of semen with her vulva, may result in a pregnancy.[24] To reduce the risk of unintended pregnancies, some people who engage in penile-vaginal sex may use contraception, such as birth control pills, a condom, diaphragms, spermicides, hormonal contraception or sterilization.[25] The effectiveness of the various contraceptive methods in avoiding pregnancy varies considerably.

Sexual activity that involves skin-to-skin contact, exposure to an infected person's bodily fluids or mucosal membranes[26] carries the risk of contracting a sexually transmitted infection. People may not be able to detect that their sexual partner has one or more STIs, for example if they are asymptomatic (show no symptoms).[27][28] The risk of STIs can be reduced by safe sex practices, such as using condoms. Both partners may opt be tested for STIs before engaging in sex.[29] There may also be an increased risk of contracting a STI when having sex with multiple partners.

Some STIs can also be contracted by using IV drug needles after their use by an infected person, as well as through childbirth or breastfeeding.

Typically, older men and women maintaining interest in sexual interest and activity could be therapeutic; it is a way of expressing their love and care for one another. Factors such as biological and psychological factors, diseases, mental conditions, boredom with the relationship, and widowhood have been found to contribute with the common decrease in sexual interest and activity in old age. National sex surveys given in Finland in the 1990s revealed aging men had a higher incidence of sexual intercourse compared to aging women and that women were more likely to report a lack of sexual desire compared to men. Regression analysis, factors considered important to female sexual activity included: sexual desire, valuing sexuality, and a healthy partner, while high sexual self-esteem, good health, and active sexual history were important to male sexual activity. Both aging genders agreed they needed good health, good sexual functioning, positive sexual self-esteem, and a sexually skilful partner to maintain sexual desire.[30]

Heterosexuality is the romantic or sexual attraction to the opposite sex. Heterosexual sexual practices are subject to laws in many places. In some countries, mostly those where religion has a strong influence on social policy, marriage laws serve the purpose of encouraging people to have sex only within marriage. Sodomy laws were seen as discouraging same-sex sexual practices, but may affect opposite-sex sexual practices. Laws also ban adults from committing sexual abuse, committing sexual acts with anyone under an age of consent, performing sexual activities in public, and engaging in sexual activities for money (prostitution). Though these laws cover both same-sex and opposite-sex sexual activities, they may differ in regard to punishment, and may be more frequently (or exclusively) enforced on those who engage in same-sex sexual activities.[31]

Different-sex sexual practices may be monogamous, serially monogamous, or polyamorous, and, depending on the definition of sexual practice, abstinent or autoerotic (including masturbation). Additionally, different religious and political movements have tried to influence or control changes in sexual practices including courting and marriage, though in most countries changes occur at a slow rate.

Homosexuality is the romantic or sexual attraction to the same sex. People with a homosexual orientation can express their sexuality in a variety of ways, and may or may not express it in their behaviors.[32] Research indicates that many gay men and lesbians want, and succeed in having, committed and durable relationships. For example, survey data indicate that between 40% and 60% of gay men and between 45% and 80% of lesbians are currently involved in a romantic relationship.[33]

It is possible for a person whose sexual identity is mainly heterosexual to engage in sexual acts with people of the same sex. For example, mutual masturbation in the context of what may be considered normal heterosexual teen development. Gay and lesbian people who pretend to be heterosexual are often referred to as being closeted (hiding their sexuality in "the closet"). "Closet case" is a derogatory term used to refer to people who hide their sexuality. Making that orientation public can be called "coming out of the closet" in the case of voluntary disclosure or "outing" in the case of disclosure by others against the subject's wishes (or without their knowledge). Among some communities (called "men on the DL" or "down-low"), same-sex sexual behavior is sometimes viewed as solely for physical pleasure. Men who have sex with men, as well as women who have sex with women, or men on the "down-low" may engage in sex acts with members of the same sex while continuing sexual and romantic relationships with the opposite sex.

People who engage exclusively in same-sex sexual practices may not identify themselves as gay or lesbian. In sex-segregated environments, individuals may seek relationships with others of their own gender (known as situational homosexuality). In other cases, some people may experiment or explore their sexuality with same (and/or different) sex sexual activity before defining their sexual identity. Despite stereotypes and common misconceptions, there are no forms of sexual acts exclusive to same-sex sexual behavior that cannot also be found in opposite-sex sexual behavior, except those involving the meeting of the genitalia between same-sex partners tribadism (generally vulva-to-vulva rubbing, commonly known by its "scissoring" position) and frot (generally penis-to-penis rubbing).

People who have a romantic or sexual attraction to both sexes are referred to as bisexual.[34][35] People who have a distinct but not exclusive preference for one sex/gender over the other may also identify themselves as bisexual.[36] Like gay and lesbian individuals, bisexual people who pretend to be heterosexual are often referred to as being closeted.

Pansexuality (also referred to as omnisexuality)[37] may or may not be subsumed under bisexuality, with some sources stating that bisexuality encompasses sexual or romantic attraction to all gender identities.[38][39] Pansexuality is characterized by the potential for aesthetic attraction, romantic love, or sexual desire towards people without regard for their gender identity or biological sex.[40] Some pansexuals suggest that they are gender-blind; that gender and sex are insignificant or irrelevant in determining whether they will be sexually attracted to others.[41] As defined in the Oxford English Dictionary, pansexuality "encompasses all kinds of sexuality; not limited or inhibited in sexual choice with regards to gender or practice".[42]

Most people experiment with a range of sexual activities during their lives, although they tend to engage in only a few of these regularly. Some people enjoy many different sexual activities, while others avoid sexual activities altogether for religious or other reasons (see chastity, sexual abstinence, asexuality). Some prefer monogamous relationships for sex, while others may prefer many different partners throughout their lives.

Alex Comfort and others propose three potential social aspects of intercourse in humans, which are not mutually exclusive: reproductive, relational, and recreational.[43] The development of the contraceptive pill and other highly effective forms of contraception in the mid- and late 20th century has increased people's ability to segregate these three functions, which still overlap a great deal and in complex patterns. For example: A fertile couple may have intercourse while using contraception to experience sexual pleasure (recreational) and also as a means of emotional intimacy (relational), thus deepening their bonding, making their relationship more stable and more capable of sustaining children in the future (deferred reproductive). This same couple may emphasize different aspects of intercourse on different occasions, being playful during one episode of intercourse (recreational), experiencing deep emotional connection on another occasion (relational), and later, after discontinuing contraception, seeking to achieve pregnancy (reproductive, or more likely reproductive and relational).

Most world religions have sought to address the moral issues that arise from people's sexuality in society and in human interactions. Each major religion has developed moral codes covering issues of sexuality, morality, ethics etc. Though these moral codes do not address issues of sexuality directly, they seek to regulate the situations which can give rise to sexual interest and to influence people's sexual activities and practices. However, the effect of religious teaching has at times been limited. For example, though most religions disapprove of extramarital sexual relations, it has always been widely practiced. Nevertheless, these religious codes have always had a strong influence on peoples' attitudes to issues of modesty in dress, behavior, speech etc.

On the other hand, some people adopt the view that pleasure is its own justification for sexual activity. Hedonism is a school of thought which argues that pleasure is the only intrinsic good.[44]

Human sexual activity, like many other kinds of activity engaged in by humans, is generally influenced by social rules that are culturally specific and vary widely. These social rules are referred to as sexual morality (what can and can not be done by society's rules) and sexual norms (what is and is not expected).

Sexual ethics, morals, and norms relate to issues including deception/honesty, legality, fidelity and consent. Some activities, known as sex crimes in some locations, are illegal in some jurisdictions, including those conducted between (or among) consenting and competent adults (examples include sodomy law and adult-adult incest).

Some people who are in a relationship but want to hide polygamous activity (possibly of opposite sexual orientation) from their partner, may solicit consensual sexual activity with others through personal contacts, online chat rooms, or, advertising in select media.

Swinging, on the other hand, involves singles or partners in a committed relationship engaging in sexual activities with others as a recreational or social activity.[45] The increasing popularity of swinging is regarded by some as arising from the upsurge in sexual activity during the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Swinging sexual activity can take place in a sex club, also known as a swinger club (not to be confused with a strip club).[46]

Some people engage in various sexual activities as a business transaction. When this involves having sex with, or performing certain actual sexual acts for another person in exchange for money or something of value, it is called prostitution. Other aspects of the adult industry include phone sex operators, strip clubs, and pornography.

Social gender roles can influence sexual behavior as well as the reaction of individuals and communities to certain incidents; the World Health Organization states that, "Sexual violence is also more likely to occur where beliefs in male sexual entitlement are strong, where gender roles are more rigid, and in countries experiencing high rates of other types of violence."[47] Some societies, such as those where the concepts of family honor and female chastity are very strong, may practice violent control of female sexuality, through practices such as honor killings and female genital mutilation.[48][49]

The relation between gender equality and sexual expression is recognized, and promotion of equity between men and women is crucial for attaining sexual and reproductive health, as stated by the UN International Conference on Population and Development Program of Action:[50]

BDSM is a variety of erotic practices or roleplaying involving bondage, dominance and submission, sadomasochism, and other interpersonal dynamics. Given the wide range of practices, some of which may be engaged in by people who do not consider themselves as practicing BDSM, inclusion in the BDSM community or subculture is usually dependent on self-identification and shared experience. BDSM communities generally welcome anyone with a non-normative streak who identifies with the community; this may include cross-dressers, extreme body modification enthusiasts, animal players, latex or rubber aficionados, and others.

B/D, a form of BDSM, is bondage and discipline. Bondage includes the restraint of the body or mind.[51] D/S means "dominant and submissive." A dominant is someone who takes control of someone who wishes to give up control. A submissive is someone who gives up the control to a person who wishes to take control.[51] S/M (sadism and masochism) means an individual who takes pleasure in the humiliation or pain of others. Masochism means an individual who takes pleasure from their own pain and/or humiliation.[51]

Unlike the usual "power neutral" relationships and play styles commonly followed by couples, activities and relationships within a BDSM context are often characterized by the participants' taking on complementary, but unequal roles; thus, the idea of informed consent of both the partners becomes essential. Participants who exert sexual dominance over their partners are known as dominants or tops, while participants who take the passive, receiving, or obedient role are known as submissives or bottoms.

Individuals are also sometimes abbreviated when referred to in writing, so a dominant person may be referred to as a "dom" for a man or a woman. Sometimes a woman may choose to use the female specific term "Domme". Both terms are pronounced the same when spoken. Individuals who can change between top/dominant and bottom/submissive roleswhether from relationship to relationship or within a given relationshipare known as switches. The precise definition of roles and self-identification is a common subject of debate within the community.[52]

In a 2013 study, the researchers suggest that BDSM is a sexual act where they play role games, use restraint, use power exchange, use suppression and pain is sometimes involved depending on individual(s).[53] The study indicates that, in the past, BDSM has been seen as maladaptive to one's psychological health, but that this may be incorrect. According to the study, one who participates in BDSM can have greater strength socially, mentally and have greater independence than those who do not practice BDSM.[53] It states that people who participate in BDSM play actually have higher subjective well-being, and that this might be due to the fact that BDSM play requires extensive communication. Before any sexual act occurs, the partners must discuss their agreement of their relationship. They discuss how long the play will last, the intensity, their actions, what each participant needs and/or desires. The sexual acts are all consensual and pleasurable to both parties.[53]

In a 2015 study, BDSM relationships were suggested to have a higher level of connection, intimacy, trust and communication compared to individuals who do not practice BDSM.[51] The study suggests that dominants and submissives exchange control for each other's pleasure and to satisfy a need. They mention that both parties enjoys pleasing their partner in any way they can. Submissive and Dominants who participated in their research, felt that this is one of the best things about BDSM. It gives a submissive pleasure to do things in general for their dominant. Where Dominant enjoys making their encounters all about the submissive. They enjoy doing things that makes their submissive happy. Their findings suggest that submissives and dominants found BDSM play more pleasurable and fun. BDSM was also suggested to improve personal growth, romantic relationships, their sense of community, their sense of self, the dominants confidence, and help an individual cope with everyday things by giving them a psychological release.[51]

There are many laws and social customs which prohibit, or in some way affect sexual activities. These laws and customs vary from country to country, and have varied over time. They cover, for example, a prohibition to non-consensual sex, to sex outside of marriage, to sexual activity in public, besides many others. Many of these restrictions are non-controversial, but some have been the subject of public debate.

Most societies consider it a serious crime to force someone to engage in sexual acts or to engage in sexual activity with someone who does not consent. This is called sexual assault, and if sexual penetration occurs it is called rape, the most serious kind of sexual assault. The details of this distinction may vary among different legal jurisdictions. Also, what constitutes effective consent in sexual matters varies from culture to culture and is frequently debated. Laws regulating the minimum age at which a person can consent to have sex (age of consent) are frequently the subject of debate, as is adolescent sexual behavior in general. Some societies have forced marriage, where consent may not be required.

Many locales have laws that limit or prohibit same-sex sexual activity.

In the West, sex before marriage is not illegal. There are social taboos and many religions condemn pre-marital sex. In many Muslim countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,[54] Afghanistan,[55][56][57] Iran,[57] Kuwait,[58] Maldives,[59] Morocco,[60] Oman,[61] Mauritania,[62] United Arab Emirates,[63][64] Sudan,[65] Yemen,[66] any form of sexual activity outside marriage is illegal. Those found guilty, especially women, may be forced to wed the sexual partner, publicly beaten, or stoned to death.[67] In many African and native tribes, sexual activity is not viewed as a privilege or right of a married couple, but rather as the unification of bodies and is thus not frowned upon.[68]

Other studies have analyzed the changing attitudes about sex that American adolescents have outside of marriage. Adolescents were asked how they felt about oral and vaginal sex in relation to their health, social, and emotional well-being. Overall, teenagers felt that oral sex was viewed as more socially positive amongst their demographic.[69] Results stated that teenagers believed that oral sex for dating and non-dating adolescents was less threatening to their overall values and beliefs than vaginal sex was.[69] When asked, teenagers who participated in the research viewed oral sex as more acceptable to their peers, and their personal values than vaginal sex.[69]

The laws of each jurisdiction set the minimum age at which a young person is allowed to engage in sexual activity.[70] This age of consent is typically between 14 and 18 years, but laws vary. In many jurisdictions, age of consent is a person's mental or functional age.[71][71][72][73] As a result, those above the set age of consent may still be considered unable to legally consent due to mental immaturity.[71][72][73][74][75] Many jurisdictions regard any sexual activity by an adult involving a child as child sexual abuse.

Age of consent may vary by the type of sexual act, the sex of the actors, or other restrictions such as abuse of a position of trust. Some jurisdictions also make allowances for young people engaged in sexual acts with each other.[76]

Most jurisdictions prohibit sexual activity between certain close relatives. These laws vary to some extent; such acts are called incestuous.

Non-consensual sexual activity or subjecting an unwilling person to witnessing a sexual activity are forms of sexual abuse, as well as (in many countries) certain non-consensual paraphilias such as frotteurism, telephone scatophilia (indecent phonecalls), and non-consensual exhibitionism and voyeurism (known as "indecent exposure" and "peeping tom" respectively).[77]

People sometimes exchange sex for money or access to other resources. This practice, called prostitution, takes place under many varied circumstances. The person who receives payment for sexual services is called a prostitute and the person who receives such services is known by a multitude of terms, including (and most commonly) "john." Prostitution is one of the branches of the sex industry. The legal status of prostitution varies from country to country, from being a punishable crime to a regulated profession. Estimates place the annual revenue generated from the global prostitution industry to be over $100 billion.[78] Prostitution is sometimes referred to as "the world's oldest profession".[79] Prostitution may be a voluntary individual activity or facilitated or forced by pimps.

Survival sex is a form of prostitution engaged in by people in need, usually when homeless or otherwise disadvantaged people trade sex for food, a place to sleep, or other basic needs, or for drugs.[80] The term is used by sex trade and poverty researchers and aid workers.[81][82]

See original here:
Human sexual activity - Wikipedia