Early humans had ADHD, scientists say after making people play game online

I think the diet and lifestyle used to be so drastically different so it's difficult to draw modern parallels.

Tendency to try different things to avoid being bored. Either new ways to do old things, or finding new hobbies.

Both can be big advantages.

An idea: the advantage of the inattentiveness is better quality of rest time. however, that requires acceptance of these periods.

according to Yuval Noah, the time requirement for hunting would be roughly 2 days a week.

>but there are other traits, such as inattentiveness, that I fail to understand how that would be a competitive advantage in hunting

Well, inattentiveness refers to modern life, and is manifested more with its overly complex demands, often also based on precise time constraints.

In hunting it might not be that much of an issue. Especially if hunting is your hyper-focus subject.

You’re thinking of it way too specifically and narrowly. Those traits might have lots of side effects you aren’t considering. There were all sorts of problems to be solved in hunter-gatherer days. Specifically hunting by stalking large prey is not the only skill that was useful back then.

It doesn’t need to be all or nothing though, humans are social creatures. If rates are similar, having 5-10% of your tribe being more exploratory could be advantageous, even if the rest are picking up slack in other areas.

Unsure if it’s pseudoscience, but similar to the argument around morning vs. evening preference being related to having someone alert for the tribe at the right times.

If the outcome of the focus vs aloof aren't equally weighted, you'd sill come out ahead?

Eg hunting when fixated on hunting, you bring back 5 times the food vs hunting while you're watching a movie in your head gets you 1/2 times the food

I think it can be phrased in terms of the famous explore/exploit dichotomy from cybernetics. An agent with ADHD is more likely to exploit/dig deeply once it gets the "scent", but that threshold is higher. A weak signal of ambient reward will lead to impatient exploring. Conversely, a non-ADHD agent will sooner find something good enough to fixate on but will also sooner give up on that region of interest and go on to the next scent. This would explain the paradox of hyper focus of ADHD and the corresponding moderation/saturation in non-ADHD as well.

It could help your hunting group not be ambushed by a surprise attack from a tiger or another hunting group.

While the other group members are looking around the ADHD group member could be more sensitive to noticing random sounds and therefore notice things like that. Therefore hunting groups with at least 1 ADHD dude would be at an advantage.

Inattentiveness kicks in for me at work (software developer) constantly, but physical activity puts me into hyper-focus. Even first-person shooter games kick me into hyper-focus. I think it all comes down to personal stimulation thresholds. I find work boring and uninteresting, but even the most mundane tasks like picking weeds is like heroin for my ADHD because I find it enjoyable and feel I'm making progress.

I have never met an ADHD person who is inattentive under stress.

An ancient human did not have to be 'productive' for long durations. They had to have intense productivity on short spurts and not be a huge mess the rest of the time.

IMO, my ADHD doesn't manifest nearly as badly if physical activities ate involved. Cooking needs long durations of focus, and I've never become inattentive during it.

Sitting on a table and staring at a screen ? Now that's an adversarial scenario.

The genes that support cognition are usually the same genes implicated in autism and adhd. Most variants imparting increased risk for those conditions are extremely common,(typical odds ratio, <<1.1). Some rare variants impart greater risk but those variants are uncommon, in part because of natural selection. If you do not have these rare variants, it typically takes a large number of common mutations before you get the condition. Thus natural selection effects against those rare variants are weak, and this ignores that there might also be beneficial effects of those common variants, either at the group level by increasing diversity of thought, or when appearing without other rare variants.

The take home is that it is much more complicated than single gene disorders where selection effects can have their greatest impact. Common variants impact on fitness are heavily conditioned on the overall genetic mileau.

Being not able to focus will cause you to jump from one thing to the next.

"Oh let me gather wood" 10 minutes later "Oh look! I found flowers" 10 minutes later "Those stones look amazing… what could we possibly do with them?" 10 minutes later "Its getting cold. where is the wood"

Isolated this may seem like a disadvantage. But the negative consequences are reduced when one is acting in a bigger group. And this jumping from topic to topic make the person become a generalist which can be useful.

It's probably the wrong tactic to figure out which task this would help with rather than the benefits that come with shifting attention among tasks.

I always imagine that ADHDers would be the gatherers in the hunter-gatherer society. That is where the inattentiveness kicks in. At least for me, when going for a walk,I always notice that I am much more aware of all the plants, flowers, berries and small mammals than my friends. I know that there is a new type of flower I never saw before near that one tree. They actually know where we were on a map.

I read somewhere about a polar bear at a zoo that compulsively paced back and forth. This is not a behavior observed in polar bears in the wild; it was likely was caused by the fact that bears are evolved to walk dozens of miles a day, but this bear lived in a small, enclosed environment.

So maybe ADHD is not adaptive, but is just a pathology caused by the mismatch between our evolved environment and our modern environment?

Maybe inattention can help you spot things when you're super bored and casting about for stimulus. You might see something you wouldn't have otherwise? Very unscientific "Just So" opinion lol

Wouldn’t its very reliable high prevalence across a wide diversity of today’s gene pools strongly suggest an early, not late or isolated, origin?

That seems scientific enough.

Given that strong persistence over time and population, the assumption that it must have advantages becomes a sensible and supported conjecture. And identifying what benefits it might have bestowed a sensible area of research toward verifying that.

Anything conclusive would require many more experiments & more evidence of course. Most individual papers in historical and behavioral evidence fields can’t settle something definitively on there own.

Here's the publication. IMO, these authors need to read The Selfish Gene, but it is an interesting theory. I have ADHD and work in a related field to these authors. This theory has been on the uptick but isn't really mainstream. I do rather like to entertain the fantasy, though.

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2022.258...

I absolutely agree. This is clickbait junk science.

Literally what “disorder” means = does not fit orderly

Yeah, there are 3 prongs to use when debating about classification: (1) statistical rarity, (2) distress, and (3) the ability to seek reasonable accomodations in the environment.

> do these traits ynegatively impact your life or the life of those around you? If they cause distress in daily living then it’s a “disorder”. If those same traits are not a problem for someone else, then it isn’t.

Agree with this.

And even when they do cause distress, it’s not uncommon for ADHD to also be associated with positive attributes as well.

Genes are not selected to make us reliably happy, but successful in a statistical way in some environment. So “disorder” definitely overstates a negative interpretation.

EDIT: A term like “processing style” would be less pejorative or opinionated.

Every common processing style that can be “high functioning” has its advantages, disadvantages, coping strategies, and ideal support systems.

None of us was born complete, a master of all thinking styles, and without the need for other kinds of people.

FURTHER EDIT: re another common “processing style”, I have dealt with more than one productive narcissist for extended time frames.

Things did not always go well is an understatement. But not always badly either - they both had many accomplishments directly helped by their “disorder”.

The mix of positive and negative features of that, not to mention the achievements of many famous people with elements of that, also suggest we need a better word than “disorder”.

Even worse in that case, the connotations of the words “narcissist” and “disorder” create a particularly strong resistance for people with those traits to learn more about themselves or openly deal with their thinking style in a practical open way.

Completely perverse terminology for knowledge that by another name could better help those people and those around them!

Agree, I've seen dozens of ADHD videos and there is nothing I can see that wouldn't apply to everyone else, unless I would also have something similar undiagnosed, but I also don't feel the necessity to get anything diagnosed

Life is hard, more and more bureaucratic, 9 to 5 is boring, too many tasks are overwhelming, too many interests too. Too much punishment, and very little guidance, too much noise. Tiktok and YT shorts don't help. But we don't need to take some pills to finally appreciate it, we to be annoyed about it, fight against it, and make something better

But if anyone can suggest a good article/video explaining it I would appreciate it

There is very high variance in diagnosis, especially with different variants of ADHD such as older people (vs children), female (vs male) and inattentive (vs hyperactive).

Almost certainly across cultures too.

So variation in diagnosis might not reflect variation in prevalence. Hopefully they did their homework.