Cited by 123Language and cultural evolutionEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology

Why does human culture increase exponentially?

Enquist, M., Ghirlanda, S., Jarrick, A., Wachtmeister, C.-A.·2008·Theoretical Population Biology

Abstract

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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tpb.2008.04.007

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The effectiveness of cultural accumulation can be attributed to the flexibility with which participants engage in social learning and independent discovery.

    “Its effectiveness can be attributed to the flexibility with which participants engage in these two mechanisms [Enquist et al., 2008, Rendell et al., 2010, Mesoudi and Thornton, 2018].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Enquist, M., Ghirlanda, S., Jarrick, A., & Wachtmeister, C.-A.
Affiliations
Stockholm University (SE)
Corresponding author
Ghirlanda, S.
Venue
Theoretical Population Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-08
Volume
74
Issue
1
Pages
46-55
ISSN
0040-5809 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2078276712
Cited by
123
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
102.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Theoretical Population Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Harvard University
  • European Commission
  • Università di Bologna
  • Marcus och Amalia Wallenbergs minnesfond
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Keywords
human creativity, cultural transmission, cultural evolution, cultural accumulation, non-genetic inheritance
MeSH terms
Creativity, Culture, Biological Evolution, Humans, Models, Statistical

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