Cited by 639Evolutionary Game Theory and CooperationLanguage and cultural evolutionEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 473 of the 473 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 390 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Cultural group selection plays an essential role in explaining human cooperation: a sketch of the evidence.

Open access

Abstract

Human cooperation is highly unusual. We live in large groups composed mostly of non-relatives. Evolutionists have proposed a number of explanations for this pattern, including cultural group selection and extensions of more general processes such as reciprocity, kin selection, and multi-level selection acting on genes. Evolutionary processes are consilient; they affect several different empirical domains, such as patterns of behavior and the proximal drivers of that behavior. In this target article, we sketch the evidence from five domains that bear on the explanatory adequacy of cultural group selection and competing hypotheses to explain human cooperation. Does cultural transmission constitute an inheritance system that can evolve in a Darwinian fashion? Are the norms that underpin institutions among the cultural traits so transmitted? Do we observe sufficient variation at the level of groups of considerable size for group selection to be a plausible process? Do human groups compete, and do success and failure in competition depend upon cultural variation? Do we observe adaptations for cooperation in humans that most plausibly arose by cultural group selection? If the answer to one of these questions is “no,” then we must look to other hypotheses. We present evidence, including quantitative evidence, that the answer to all of the questions is “yes” and argue that we must take the cultural group selection hypothesis seriously. If culturally transmitted systems of rules (institutions) that limit individual deviance organize cooperation in human societies, then it is not clear that any extant alternative to cultural group selection can be a complete explanation.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).

TL;DR

Richerson et al. argue that cultural group selection (CGS) is an essential and empirically plausible explanation for human cooperation among non-relatives, drawing on evidence from five domains. They conclude that culture acts as an inheritance system, group-level cultural variation is substantial, groups compete, and group-functional adaptations exist, though quantitative estimates of CGS strength remain incomplete.

Key findings

  • Culture acts as an inheritance system: developmental evidence shows imitation and teaching emerge in the first 12 months, and historical/linguistic data show phylogenetic descent with modification; in Tupi cultural domains, rates were usually less than five transitions in 10 millennia.
  • Cultural F_ST between neighboring groups is consistently greater than 0.01, with some traits above 0.6; for neighboring groups that might compete, cultural F_ST is approximately an order of magnitude larger than genetic F_ST.
  • Intergroup competition is documented: among the Turkana, 1% of male mortality is from within-Turkana violence versus 50% from inter-ethnic raids; average raids include 315 men, with some up to 1,000; large-scale warfare can involve mostly unrelated individuals (e.g., Stalingrad involved more than 1.7 million soldiers and over two million casualties).
  • Group-functional institutions and religion show effects: costly ritual displays correlate with commune longevity across more than 800 U.S. communes over 200 years; Soltis et al. estimated group extinction rates could spread a group-beneficial cultural trait to most of a metapopulation in 500–1,000 years.

Methods

  • The target article is a synthetic review or “sketch” of evidence from five domains: culture as an inheritance system, group-level cultural variation, intergroup competition, group-level functionality, and gene-culture coevolution.
  • Quantitative component: cultural F_ST was calculated from survey responses (World Values Survey, AfroBarometer, Public Policy Institute of California surveys, Scottish Health Survey, Anwar Sadat Chair Arab Public Opinion Surveys, among others) for neighboring political, religious, ethnic, geographic, and socioeconomic groups; the Price equation was used to express conditions for group selection.
  • Evidence is drawn from developmental psychology, historical linguistics and phylogenetics, ethnography, archaeology, economic organization, religion, and warfare.

Limitations

  • The paper states it cannot provide a precise quantitative account of CGS importance relative to competing processes; too few quantitative studies exist, and direct evidence for culture-led gene-culture coevolution is strong only for genes that do not directly affect behavior.
  • The paper notes uncertainty about how similar modern foragers are to Pleistocene foragers and that direct evidence for Pleistocene warfare is very limited.
  • The text makes evident that cultural F_ST from ethnographic data is often impossible because ethnographers typically report only normative behavior and neglect individual variation; the survey-based F_ST estimates also rely on group classifications that may not capture heritable cultural variation or cooperation-relevant traits.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0140525x1400106x

Cites

473 of 473 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

328 Not checked yet · 224 Own interpretation · 97 No basis given · 7 Own result · 6 Own method

Verify all 390 references — free account

Show all 384 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 157
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 154
278 of 278
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The most ancient human groups are the ethnolinguistic tribes into which simpler societies are generally divided.

    “The most ancient groups are the ethnolinguistic tribes into which simpler societies are generally divided.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The debate about the importance of CGS relative to competing explanations for human cooperation has not been fully engaged.

    “Heretofore, the debate about the importance of CGS relative to competing explanations for human cooperation has not been fully engaged.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Stone tool manufacture may go back three million years, and edge-wear evidence suggests that early stone tools were used to make a toolkit of perishable materials such as wood and hides.

    “Stone tool manufacture may go back three million years, and edge-wear evidence suggests that early stone tools were used to make a toolkit of perishable materials such as wood and hides.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Psychological and cognitive consequences of cooperative breeding in nonhuman primates also arose when our hominin ancestors, but none of the other great apes, started to engage in cooperative breeding.

    “It is thus most parsimonious to assume that such psychological and cognitive consequences also arose when our hominin ancestors, but none of the other great apes, started to engage in cooperative breeding”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Selection operates only on phenotypes, and phenotypes must develop before they are exposed to selection.

    “Because selection operates only on phenotypes, and phenotypes must develop before they are exposed to selection, we are skeptical of models of the evolution of cooperation that attribute fitness benefits to adults only.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Everyone's first group, tribe, society, institution, ethnolinguistic unit, and culture is the mother-infant group.

    “From the perspective of attachment theoryand infantseveryone's first group, tribe, society, institution, ethnolinguistic unit, and culture is the mother-infant group.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The debate on CGS lacks sufficient consideration of CGS's potential moderators.

    “the debate lacks sufficient consideration of CGS's potential moderators.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Substantive explanations of human evolution must be located within culture-led gene-culture coevolution.

    “Culture-led gene-culture coevolution is a framework within which substantive explanations of human evolution must be located.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Cultural group selection models assume that individuals copy the behaviour of others and acquire cooperative strategies via social learning.

    “A central assumption of CGS models is that individuals copy the behaviour of others and acquire cooperative strategies via social learning.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Cultural difference is one of the foundational assumptions of anthropology.

    “Cultural difference is one of the foundational assumptions of anthropology, so we should expect to find it.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Netsilik did not trust a hunter to be altruistic or to voluntarily cooperate, and created an organizational system that depended on neither.

    “In their social contract, the Netsilik did not trust a hunter to be altruistic or to voluntarily cooperate, and they instead created an organizational system that depended on neither of these.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Individual Netsilik hunters would likely not survive without averaging hunting risks over a pool of hunters.

    “Cheating, in the sense of opting out of acting in accordance with being a sealing partner, was not a viable option in a context in which individual hunters would likely not survive without averaging hunting risks over a pool of hunters.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Information on variation within societies is very scanty compared to estimates of between-society variation.

    “Unfortunately, information on variation within societies is very scanty compared to estimates of between-society variation.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Competition between the political units known as "countries" is seldom the key level at which selection takes place.

    “It is also undoubtedly the case that competition between the political units known as "countries" is seldom the key level at which selection takes place.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    A given classification of individuals into groups can be assumed for the purpose of calculating the scope for group selection on a focal cultural trait.

    “We simply illustrate that, if we assume a given classification of individuals into groups, we can calculate the scope for group selection to act on the focal cultural trait as a function of this classification.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Many human groups have formal criteria for membership and are often symbolically marked by language, dialect, and other differences.

    “It is true that many human groups have formal criteria for membership and are often symbolically marked by language, dialect, and other differences.”
16 of 16

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 473 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Tilly, 1992, Coercion, capital and European states
  2. Hurford, 2011, The origins of grammar: Language in the light of evolution II
  3. Labov, 2001, Principles of linguistic change: Social factors, vol. 29
  4. Shariff, 2009, Evolution, culture, and the human brain, 119
  5. Turchin, 2003, Historical dynamics

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 639

Metadata

Authors
Richerson, P., Baldini, R., Bell, A. V., Demps, K., Frost, K., Hillis, V., Mathew, S., Newton, E. K., Naar, N., Newson, L., Ross, C., Smaldino, P. E., Waring, T. M., & Zefferman, M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Boise State University (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • Dominican University of California (US)
  • Santa Fe Institute (US)
  • University of Maine (US)
  • National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (US)
Venue
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Published
2014-10-28
Volume
39
Pages
e30-e30
ISSN
  • 0140-525X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1825
OpenAlex
W2155058526
Cited by
639
References
473
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 82 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 66 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 3
FWCI
108.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioral and Brain Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarWorks (Boise State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (CAREER)
  • National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
cultural group selection, human cooperation, cultural transmission, institutions, norms, group competition, reciprocity, kin selection, multilevel selection, non-relatives
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Altruism, Competitive Behavior, Cooperative Behavior, Cultural Evolution, Biological Evolution, Group Processes, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Selection, Genetic, Social Behavior

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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