A new paper has just come out in TREE by Patrick Bateson and Kevin Laland. They seek to update Tinbergens four questions, that he proposed 50 years ago. These questions are for behaviour researchers and are as follows: what is it for? how did it develop? how did it evolve? and how does it work.
Here is the first paragraph:
"This year is the 50th anniversary of Tinbergen's (1963) article ‘On aims and methods of ethology’, where he first outlined the four ‘major problems of biology’. The classification of the four problems, or questions, is one of Tinbergen's most enduring legacies, and it remains as valuable today as 50 years ago in highlighting the value of a comprehensive, multifaceted understanding of a characteristic, with answers to each question providing complementary insights. Nonetheless, much has changed in the intervening years, and new data call for a more nuanced application of Tinbergen's framework. The anniversary would seem a suitable opportunity to reflect on the four questions and evaluate the scientific work that they encourage."
It is a good read and shows that old ideas are still important but that things obviously need a bit of updating.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016953471300236X
Here is the first paragraph:
"This year is the 50th anniversary of Tinbergen's (1963) article ‘On aims and methods of ethology’, where he first outlined the four ‘major problems of biology’. The classification of the four problems, or questions, is one of Tinbergen's most enduring legacies, and it remains as valuable today as 50 years ago in highlighting the value of a comprehensive, multifaceted understanding of a characteristic, with answers to each question providing complementary insights. Nonetheless, much has changed in the intervening years, and new data call for a more nuanced application of Tinbergen's framework. The anniversary would seem a suitable opportunity to reflect on the four questions and evaluate the scientific work that they encourage."
It is a good read and shows that old ideas are still important but that things obviously need a bit of updating.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016953471300236X
RSS Feed
