Cited by 313Language and cultural evolutionLanguage Development and DisordersChild and Animal Learning Development

Iterated learning and the evolution of language

Open access
Kirby, Simon, Griffiths, Tom, Smith, Kenny·2014·Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Abstract

Iterated learning describes the process whereby an individual learns their behaviour by exposure to another individual's behaviour, who themselves learnt it in the same way. It can be seen as a key mechanism of cultural evolution. We review various methods for understanding how behaviour is shaped by the iterated learning process: computational agent-based simulations; mathematical modelling; and laboratory experiments in humans and non-human animals. We show how this framework has been used to explain the origins of structure in language, and argue that cultural evolution must be considered alongside biological evolution in explanations of language origins.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.conb.2014.07.014

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Iterated interaction can be considered to generate Markov chains in the long-run, which gives a well-formed framework to analyze the asymptotic effects of local decisions.

    “It is known that iterated interaction can be considered to generate Markov chains in the long-run, which gives us a well-formed framework to analyze the asymptotic effects of local decision [72, 74].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. J. R. Hurford, The Origins of Grammar: Language in the Light of Evolution II, Vol. 2, Oxford University Press, 2011.
  2. T. Deacon, The Symbolic Species, Penguin, London, 1997.
  3. F. C. Bartlett, Remembering, Macmillan, Oxford, 1932.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kirby, S., Griffiths, T., & Smith, K.
Affiliations
University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Kirby, Simon
Venue
Current Opinion in Neurobiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-10
Volume
28
Pages
108-114
ISSN
0959-4388 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2046104360
Cited by
313
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 12 · 2013: 1
FWCI
11.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Neurobiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
iterated learning, language evolution, cultural evolution, origin of language, agent-based modeling, mathematical modeling, laboratory experiments, non-human animals, evolution, language structure
MeSH terms
Animals, Cultural Evolution, Biological Evolution, Humans, Language, Learning, Models, Theoretical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review