Transmission fidelity is the key to the build-up of cumulative culture

Many animals have socially transmitted behavioural traditions, but human culture appears unique in that it is cumulative, i.e. human cultural traits increase in diversity and complexity over time. It is often suggested that high-fidelity cultural transmission is necessary for cumulative culture to occur through refinement, a process known as 'ratcheting', but this hypothesis has never been formally evaluated. We discuss processes of information transmission and loss of traits from a cognitive viewpoint alongside other cultural processes of novel invention (generation of entirely new traits), modification (refinement of existing traits) and combination (bringing together two established traits to generate a new trait). We develop a simple cultural transmission model that does not assume major evolutionary changes (e.g. in brain architecture) and show that small changes in the fidelity with which information is passed between individuals can lead to cumulative culture. In comparison, modification and combination have a lesser influence on, and novel invention appears unimportant to, the ratcheting process. Our findings support the idea that high-fidelity transmission is the key driver of human cumulative culture, and that progress in cumulative culture depends more on trait combination than novel invention or trait modification.     

Evolution of cultural traits occurs at similar relative rates in different world regions

A fundamental issue in understanding human diversity is whether or not there are regular patterns and processes involved in cultural change. Theoretical and mathematical models of cultural evolution have been developed and are increasingly being used and assessed in empirical analyses. Here, we test the hypothesis that the rates of change of features of human socio-cultural organization are governed by general rules. One prediction of this hypothesis is that different cultural traits will tend to evolve at similar relative rates in different world regions, despite the unique historical backgrounds of groups inhabiting these regions. We used phylogenetic comparative methods and systematic cross-cultural data to assess how different socio-cultural traits changed in (i) island southeast Asia and the Pacific, and (ii) sub-Saharan Africa. The relative rates of change in these two regions are significantly correlated. Furthermore, cultural traits that are more directly related to external environmental conditions evolve more slowly than traits related to social structures. This is consistent with the idea that a form of purifying selection is acting with greater strength on these more environmentally linked traits. These results suggest that despite contingent historical events and the role of humans as active agents in the historical process, culture does indeed evolve in ways that can be predicted from general principles     

Genes,culture, and the human niche: An overview

The sharp distinction between biological traits and culturally based traits, which had long been standard in evolutionary approaches to behavior, was blurred in the early 1980s by mathematical models that allowed a co‐dependent evolution of genetic transmission and cultural information. Niche‐construction theory has since added another contrast to standard evolutionary theory, in that it views niche construction as a cause of evolutionary change rather than simply a product of selection. While offering a new understanding of the coevolution of genes, culture, and human behavior, niche‐construction models also invoke multivariate causality, which require multiple time series to resolve. The empirical challenge lies in obtaining time‐series data on causal pathways involved in the coevolution of genes, culture, and behavior. This is a significant issue in archeology, where time series are often sparse and causal behaviors are represented only by proxies in the material record.     

An experimental demonstration of the effect of group size on cultural accumulation

Cumulative culture is thought to have played a major role in hominin evolution, and so an understanding of the factors that affect cultural accumulation is important for understanding human evolution. Population size may be one such factor, with larger populations thought to be able to support more complex cultural traits. This hypothesis has been suggested by mathematical models and empirical studies of small-scale societies. However, to date there have been few experimental demonstrations of an effect of population size on cultural accumulation. Here we provide such a demonstration using a novel task, solving jigsaw puzzles. 80 participants divided into ten transmission chains solved puzzles in one of two conditions: one in which participants had access to one semi-completed puzzle from the previous generation, and the other in which participants simultaneously saw three semi-completed puzzles from the previous generation. As predicted, the mean number of pieces solved increased over time in the three-puzzle-per-generation condition, but not in the one-puzzle-per-generation condition. Thus, our experiment provides support for a hypothesized relationship between population size and cultural accumulation. In particular, our results suggest that the ability to simultaneously learn from multiple cultural models, and combine the knowledge of those multiple models, is most likely to allow larger groups to support more complex culture.     

Cultural niche construction and human evolution

Organisms frequently choose, regulate, construct and destroy important components of their environments, in the process changing the selection pressures to which they and other organisms are exposed. We refer to these processes as niche construction. In humans, culture has greatly amplified our capacity for niche construction and our ability to modify selection pressures. We use gene‐culture coevolutionary models to explore the evolutionary consequences of culturally generated niche construction through human evolution. Our analysis suggests that where cultural traits are transmitted in an unbiased fashion from parent to offspring, cultural niche construction will have a similar effect to gene‐based niche construction. However, cultural transmission biases favouring particular cultural traits may either increase or reduce the range of parameter space over which niche construction has an impact, which means that niche construction with biased transmission will either have a much smaller or a much bigger effect than gene‐based niche construction. The analysis also reveals circumstances under which cultural transmission can overwhelm natural selection, accelerate the rate at which a favoured gene spreads, initiate novel evolutionary events and trigger hominid speciation. Because cultural processes typically operate faster than natural selection, cultural niche construction probably has more profound consequences than gene‐based niche construction, and is likely to have played an important role in human evolution.     

Runaway cultural niche construction

Cultural niche construction is a uniquely potent source of selection on human populations, and a major cause of recent human evolution. Previous theoretical analyses have not, however, explored the local effects of cultural niche construction. Here, we use spatially explicit coevolutionary models to investigate how cultural processes could drive selection on human genes by modifying local resources. We show that cultural learning, expressed in local niche construction, can trigger a process with dynamics that resemble runaway sexual selection. Under a broad range of conditions, cultural niche-constructing practices generate selection for gene-based traits and hitchhike to fixation through the build up of statistical associations between practice and trait. This process can occur even when the cultural practice is costly, or is subject to counteracting transmission biases, or the genetic trait is selected against. Under some conditions a secondary hitchhiking occurs, through which genetic variants that enhance the capability for cultural learning are also favoured by similar dynamics. We suggest that runaway cultural niche construction could have played an important role in human evolution, helping to explain why humans are simultaneously the species with the largest relative brain size, the most potent capacity for niche construction and the greatest reliance on culture.     

Evolution of social learning does not explain the origin of human cumulative culture

Because culture requires transmission of information between individuals, thinking about the origin of culture has mainly focused on the genetic evolution of abilities for social learning. Current theory considers how social learning affects the adaptiveness of a single cultural trait, yet human culture consists of the accumulation of very many traits. Here we introduce a new modeling strategy that tracks the adaptive value of many cultural traits, showing that genetic evolution favors only limited social learning owing to the accumulation of maladaptive as well as adaptive culture. We further show that culture can be adaptive, and refined social learning can evolve, if individuals can identify and discard maladaptive culture. This suggests that the evolution of such "adaptive filtering" mechanisms may have been crucial for the birth of human culture.     

Random copying,frequency-dependent copying and culture change

Previous evolutionary analyses of human culture have found that a simple model of random copying, analogous to neutral genetic drift, can generate the distinct power-law frequency distribution of cultural traits that is typical of various real-world cultural datasets, such as first names, patent citations and prehistoric pottery types. Here, we use agent-based simulations to explore the effects of frequency-dependent copying (e.g., conformity and anti-conformity) on this power-law distribution. We find that when traits are actively selected on the basis of their frequency, then the power-law distribution is severely disrupted. Conformity generates a “winner-takes-all” distribution in which popular traits dominate, while anti-conformity generates a “humped” distribution in which traits of intermediate frequency are favoured. However, a more passive frequency-dependent “trimming”, in which traits are selectively ignored on the basis of their frequency, generates reasonable approximations to the power-law distribution. This frequency-dependent trimming may therefore be difficult to distinguish from genuine random copying using population-level data alone. Implications for the study of both human and nonhuman culture are discussed.     

The Number of Cultural Traits Is Correlated with Female Group Size but Not with Male Group Size in Chimpanzee Communities

What determines the number of cultural traits present in chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) communities is poorly understood. In humans, theoretical models suggest that the frequency of cultural traits can be predicted by population size. In chimpanzees, however, females seem to have a particularly important role as cultural carriers. Female chimpanzees use tools more frequently than males. They also spend more time with their young, skewing the infants'' potential for social learning towards their mothers. In Gombe, termite fishing has been shown to be transmitted from mother to offspring. Lastly, it is female chimpanzees that transfer between communities and thus have the possibility of bringing in novel cultural traits from other communities. From these observations we predicted that females are more important cultural carriers than males. Here we show that the reported number of cultural traits in chimpanzee communities correlates with the number of females in chimpanzee communities, but not with the number of males. Hence, our results suggest that females are the carriers of chimpanzee culture.     

The evolution of teaching

Teaching, alongside imitation, is widely thought to underlie the success of humanity by allowing high-fidelity transmission of information, skills, and technology between individuals, facilitating both cumulative knowledge gain and normative culture. Yet, it remains a mystery why teaching should be widespread in human societies but extremely rare in other animals. We explore the evolution of teaching using simple genetic models in which a single tutor transmits adaptive information to a related pupil at a cost. Teaching is expected to evolve where its costs are outweighed by the inclusive fitness benefits that result from the tutor's relatives being more likely to acquire the valuable information. We find that teaching is not favored where the pupil can easily acquire the information on its own, or through copying others, or for difficult to learn traits, where teachers typically do not possess the information to pass on to relatives. This leads to a narrow range of traits for which teaching would be efficacious, which helps to explain the rarity of teaching in nature, its unusual distribution, and its highly specific nature. Further models that allow for cumulative cultural knowledge gain suggest that teaching evolved in humans because cumulative culture renders otherwise difficult-to-acquire valuable information available to teach.     

Why does human culture increase exponentially?

Historical records show that culture can increase exponentially in time, e.g., in number of poems, musical works, scientific discoveries. We model how human capacities for creativity and cultural transmission may make such an increase possible, suggesting that: (1) creativity played a major role at the origin of human culture and for its accumulation throughout history, because cultural transmission cannot, on its own, generate exponentially increasing amounts of culture; (2) exponential increase in amount of culture can only occur if creativity is positively influenced by culture. The evolution of cultural transmission is often considered the main genetic bottleneck for the origin of culture, because natural selection cannot favor cultural transmission without any culture to transmit. Our models suggest that an increase in individual creativity may have been the first step toward human culture, because in a population of creative individuals there may be enough non-genetic information to favor the evolution of cultural transmission.     

Culture universals and genes

The Western idea of culture is built in opposition to that of nature. Among anthropologist the culture is a complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, law, custum and any capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society. The human specificity of culture is now openly discussed, the idea of an envolved structural base to behaviour is more admitted by the community of scientist but the question of an hereditary base to cultural traits is still unsolved.     

Cultural macroevolution and the transmission of traits

Cultural traits are distributed across human societies in a patterned way. Study of the mechanisms whereby cultural traits persist and change over time is key to understanding human cultural diversity. For more than a century, a central question has engaged anthropologists interested in the study of cultural trait variation: What is the source of cultural variation? More precisely, are cultural traits transmitted primarily from ancestral to descendant populations (vertical transmission) or between contemporary, typically neighboring populations (horizontal transmission), or do they emerge as independent innovations? While debates among unilineal evolutionists and diffusionists have long since faded, there is still much uncertainty about how traits are transmitted at this macroevolutionary level, as well as about the implications of these transmission patterns for testing hypotheses regarding the adaptive function of particular cultural traits across human populations.     

Culture theory: The developing synthesis from biology

Conclusions We believe that a useful, complete theory of culture is simpler than the dichotomies promoted by the coevolutionary approach suggest. Culture can be regarded as an aspect of the environment into which each human is born and must succeed or fail, developed gradually by the succession of humans who have lived throughout history. We hypothesize that culture results from the inclusive-fitness-maximizing efforts of all humans who have lived. We think the evidence suggests that cultural traits are, in general, vehicles of genic survival, and that the heritability of cultural traits depends on the judgments (conscious and unconscious) of individuals with regard to their effects on the individual's inclusive fitness.The challenge now before students of culture is to understand the proximate mechanisms, especially the ontogeny of learning biases, that result in the acquisition and transmission of cultural traits. How, for example, do we learn what constitutes an appropriate return on a social investment in different circumstances; i.e., what causes us to feel rewarded by, say, helping offspring who do not help us back, yet consistently to begrudge lesser expenditures to most others, or to feel cheated if we are not compensated for such expenditures immediately? We suggest that the answers to such questions lie in a few basic evolved learning tendencies.     

Does Biology Constrain Culture?

Most social scientists would agree that the capacity for human culture was probably fashioned by natural selection, but they disagree about the implications of this supposition. Some believe that natural selection imposes important constraints on the ways in which culture can vary, while others believe that any such constraints must be negligible. This article employs a "thought experiment" to demonstrate that neither of these positions can be justified by appeal to general properties of culture or of evolution. Natural selection can produce mechanisms of cultural transmission that are neither adaptive nor consistent with the predictions of acultural evolutionary models (those ignoring cultural evolution). On the other hand, natural selection can also produce mechanisms of cultural transmission that are highly consistent with acultural models. Thus, neither side of the sociobiology debate is justified in dismissing the arguments of the other. Natural selection may impose significant constraints on some human behaviors, but negligible constraints on others. Models of simultaneous genetic/cultural evolution will be useful in identifying domains in which acultural evolutionary models are, and are not, likely to be useful.     

DIRECTIONAL CULTURAL CHANGE BY MODIFICATION AND REPLACEMENT OF MEMES

Evolutionary approaches to culture remain contentious. A source of contention is that cultural mutation may be substantial and, if it drives cultural change, then current evolutionary models are not adequate. But we lack studies quantifying the contribution of mutations to directional cultural change. We estimated the contribution of one type of cultural mutations—modification of memes—to directional cultural change using an amenable study system: learned birdsongs in a species that recently entered an urban habitat. Many songbirds have higher minimum song frequency in cities, to alleviate masking by low‐frequency noise. We estimated that the input of meme modifications in an urban songbird population explains about half the extent of the population divergence in song frequency. This contribution of cultural mutations is large, but insufficient to explain the entire population divergence. The remaining divergence is due to selection of memes or creation of new memes. We conclude that the input of cultural mutations can be quantitatively important, unlike in genetic evolution, and that it operates together with other mechanisms of cultural evolution. For this and other traits, in which the input of cultural mutations might be important, quantitative studies of cultural mutation are necessary to calibrate realistic models of cultural evolution.     

The dynamics of culture lost and conserved: demic migration as a force in new diaspora communities

Migration is a major feature of past and especially today's globalized cultures, and understanding how migration shapes cultural groups is key to the empirical applications of cultural transmission theory. Developed here is a migration–assimilation model describing the population-level dynamics of diaspora culture. Using ethnographic data collected from 2009 to 2010 in the Kingdom of Tonga and a Tongan diaspora community, key parameters of the model were estimated and the fitted model simulated to describe diaspora cultural dynamics in the Tongan case. The relative contribution of recent migrants to the population-level expression of several cultural traits is highlighted in the simulation. Results show that the dependence on the Tongan homeland as a source of conservative culture through migration is variable and trait specific. For traits with higher assimilation rates, the contribution of recent Tongan migrants is substantial, while for other traits with lower assimilation rates, the influence of Tongan migrants is muted. Preliminary hypotheses to explain the trait-specific assimilation rates are discussed.     

Is there a role for culture in human behavioral ecology?

Most research in human behavioral ecology has been acultural, which raises the question of how best to incorporate the concept of culture into this approach. A necessary step in this direction is to pare the culture concept down to its ideational elements, excluding behavior and its material products (Durham 1991; Geertz 1973; Keesing 1974). The cultural and reproductive success hypothesis, though empirically successful (Irons 1993), is not a model for all of culture because of widespread discrepancies between behavior and culture to which it does not call attention. Cultural transmission models are also weakened by such discrepancies, but, more importantly, such models are most relevant to phenomena different from those central to human behavioral ecology. A better way to incorporate culture into human behavioral ecology is to see it as the context of human action and as a tool people use in social manipulation. The study of signal systems is a key to an understanding of social manipulation and to the incorporation of culture into human behavioral ecology. Examples of the manipulation of culture for reproductive benefit include Yanomamö kin term manipulation (Chagnon 1988), incest rules (Thornhill 1990, 1991), and the derogation of sexual competitors (Buss and Dedden 1990). The human behavioral ecological study of social manipulation in cultural contexts needs to be expanded. Two phenomena that might shed light on such manipulation are the Rashomon effect and the audience effect.     

Cumulative cultural dynamics and the coevolution of cultural innovation and transmission: an ESS model for panmictic and structured populations

When individuals in a population can acquire traits through learning, each individual may express a certain number of distinct cultural traits. These traits may have been either invented by the individual himself or acquired from others in the population. Here, we develop a game theoretic model for the accumulation of cultural traits through individual and social learning. We explore how the rates of innovation, decay, and transmission of cultural traits affect the evolutionary stable (ES) levels of individual and social learning and the number of cultural traits expressed by an individual when cultural dynamics are at a steady‐state. We explore the evolution of these phenotypes in both panmictic and structured population settings. Our results suggest that in panmictic populations, the ES level of learning and number of traits tend to be independent of the social transmission rate of cultural traits and is mainly affected by the innovation and decay rates. By contrast, in structured populations, where interactions occur between relatives, the ES level of learning and the number of traits per individual can be increased (relative to the panmictic case) and may then markedly depend on the transmission rate of cultural traits. This suggests that kin selection may be one additional solution to Rogers's paradox of nonadaptive culture.     

The adaptive significance of cultural behavior

In this article, I argue that human social behavior is a product of the coevolution of human biology and culture. While critical of attempts by anthropologists to explain cultural practices as if they were independent of the ability of individual human beings to survive and reproduce, I am also leery of attempts by biologists to explain the consistencies between neo-Darwinian theory and cultural behavior as the result of natural selection for that behavior. Instead, I propose that both biological and cultural attributes of human beings result to a large degree from the selective retention of traits that enhance the inclusive fitnesses of individuals in their environments. Aspects of human biology and culture may be adaptive in the same sense despite differences between the mechanisms of selection and regardless of their relative importance in the evolution of a trait. The old idea that organic and cultural evolution are complementary can thus be used to provide new explanations for why people do what they do.This article was prepared from remarks I presented at the Smithsonian Conference on Human Biogeography in April 1974. Help with phenotypic costs came from an NSF Pre-doctoral Fellowship and the University of Michigan Society of Fellows.