The age-old philosophical, biological, and social debate over the basic nature of humans as being “universally selfish” or “universally good” continues today highlighting sharply divergent views of natural social order. Here we analyze advances in biology, genetics and neuroscience increasing our understanding of the evolution, features and neurocircuitry of the human brain underlying behavior in the selfish–selfless spectrum. First, we examine evolutionary pressures for selection of altruistic traits in species with protracted periods of dependence on parents and communities for subsistence and acquisition of learned behaviors. Evidence supporting the concept that altruistic potential is a common feature in human populations is developed. To go into greater depth in assessing critical features of the social brain, the two extremes of selfish–selfless behavior, callous unemotional psychopaths and zealous altruists who take extreme measures to help others, are compared on behavioral traits, structural/functional neural features, and the relative contributions of genetic inheritance versus acquired cognitive learning to their mindsets. Evidence from population groups ranging from newborns, adopted children, incarcerated juveniles, twins and mindfulness meditators point to the important role of neuroplasticity and the dopaminergic reward systems in forming and reforming neural circuitry in response to personal experience and cultural influences in determining behavior in the selfish–selfless spectrum. The underlying neural circuitry differs between psychopaths and altruists with emotional processing being profoundly muted in psychopaths and significantly enhanced in altruists. But both groups are characterized by the reward system of the brain shaping behavior. Instead of rigid assignment of human nature as being “universally selfish” or “universally good,” both characterizations are partial truths based on the segments of the selfish–selfless spectrum being examined. In addition, individuals and populations can shift in the behavioral spectrum in response to cognitive therapy and social and cultural experience, and approaches such as mindfulness training for introspection and reward-activating compassion are entering the mainstream of clinical care for managing pain, depression, and stress.

Background: Little information exists on the research productivity of successfully promoted tenure-track Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) faculty. Objective: To determine the research productivity that typically results in successful promotion. Design: We collected publicly available curriculum vitae (CVs) from faculty currently in accredited DPT programs and who had been successfully promoted from an institution in the southeastern USA from 2000 through 2016. Total publication count, journal impact factor, funding, citations, and other metrics were analysed from 45 subjects of 22 of the 64 CAPTE-accredited DPT programs in the southeast. Results: None of the studied metrics were normally distributed with time to promotion as determined by a Shapiro-Wilk test. These faculty exhibited a median publication count of 4, range 0 to 43; median of average citation count of 12.4, range 0 to 87.25; median of average journal impact factor of 2.866, range 0 to 6.280; median external funding received of $9910, range $0.00 to $19 543 198; and median author h-index of 3, range 0 to 17. The median number of years before promotion was 6, ranging from 3 to 13 years. Linear regression analysis indicates a poor fit with no significant correlation between years before promotion and any of the studied metrics. No correlation between journal impact factor and number of citations was observed (m = −0.22, p = 0.728, R² = 0.0003). Prior to promotion 31% (14 of 45) did not receive external funding and 24% (11 of 45) had a 0 h-index. The Carnegie Classification of the institution did not significantly correlate with research productivity metrics in this dataset (p = 0.213). Conclusion: While faculty unsuccessful in promotion were not identifiable using this method, this research can be used by faculty and committees to evaluate research productivity against regional data and promote competitive standards with peer institutions. Abbreviations: CAPTE: Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapist Education; DPT: Doctor of Physical Therapy

Objectives: The purpose of this retrospective study is to further the limited body of evidence regarding the effects of a group-based boxing intervention for those with Parkinson’s disease (PD). Design: A retrospective cohort study was performed analyzing data collected on outcome measures at 6-month intervals up to 2 years. Individuals participated in the standardized “Rock Steady Boxing” (RSB) program for up to 24 months. Every 6 months, measures were taken of balance (Fullerton Advanced Balance [FAB] Scale), functional mobility (Timed-Up and Go [TUG]), lower extremity strength (30-second Chair Stand [30CST]), and gait speed (10 Meter Walk Test [10MWT]). Methods: Statistical significance (P < .05) was determined by a two-tailed t test. Data were collected from RSB-affiliated programs at 4 locations across the southeastern United States. Current and/or past participants in RSB with baseline and at least one subsequent outcome measure were included, resulting in 68 participants (54 male, 14 female, and mean age of 71.2 years ± 8.56 standard deviation). Results: Statistically significant improvements in FAB scale, TUG, and 30CST over time were found at both 6- and 12-month time points. Significant changes continued through 18 months for FAB and 30CST. No significant changes in 10MWT were observed; however, a moderate effect size was observed at the 1-year point. Conclusions: Participants with PD were able to achieve statistically significant improvements in standard measures of functional mobility, balance, and strength within the timeline of this study. Limitations include the retrospective nature, an inability to monitor adherence, and lack of control over pharmaceutical or other interventions.