The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The cognitive niche: Coevolution of intelligence, sociality, and language
Open accessAbstract
Although Darwin insisted that human intelligence could be fully explained by the theory of evolution, the codiscoverer of natural selection, Alfred Russel Wallace, claimed that abstract intelligence was of no use to ancestral humans and could only be explained by intelligent design. Wallace's apparent paradox can be dissolved with two hypotheses about human cognition. One is that intelligence is an adaptation to a knowledge-using, socially interdependent lifestyle, the “cognitive niche.” This embraces the ability to overcome the evolutionary fixed defenses of plants and animals by applications of reasoning, including weapons, traps, coordinated driving of game, and detoxification of plants. Such reasoning exploits intuitive theories about different aspects of the world, such as objects, forces, paths, places, states, substances, and other people's beliefs and desires. The theory explains many zoologically unusual traits in Homo sapiens, including our complex toolkit, wide range of habitats and diets, extended childhoods and long lives, hypersociality, complex mating, division into cultures, and language (which multiplies the benefit of knowledge because know-how is useful not only for its practical benefits but as a trade good with others, enhancing the evolution of cooperation). The second hypothesis is that humans possess an ability of metaphorical abstraction, which allows them to coopt faculties that originally evolved for physical problem-solving and social coordination, apply them to abstract subject matter, and combine them productively. These abilities can help explain the emergence of abstract cognition without supernatural or exotic evolutionary forces and are in principle testable by analyses of statistical signs of selection in the human genome.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001 · Cited by 20,632
The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism
Trivers, R. L. (1971) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/406755 · Cited by 11,010
The Adapted mind : evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture
Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992) · Cited by 5,221
Handbook of Affective Sciences
(2002) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195126013.001.0001 · Cited by 5,073
PINKER, S. (1999) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb08538.x · Cited by 3,738
Self-citationFoundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution
Jackendoff, R. (2002) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001 · Cited by 3,244
(2003) · Cited by 2,898
Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring
Nowak, M. A., & Sigmund, K. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/31225 · Cited by 2,700
Language and the mind: (400082009-004)
Chomsky, N. (1968) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e400082009-004 · Cited by 2,504
The blank slate: the modern denial of human nature
(2003) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-4305 · Cited by 2,443
Cited by
The cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human adaptation
Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J., & Henrich, J. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1100290108 · Cited by 1,303
Is It Good to Cooperate? Testing the Theory of Morality-as-Cooperation in 60 Societies
Curry, O. S., Mullins, D. A., & Whitehouse, H. (2019) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/701478 · Cited by 734
Richerson, P., Baldini, R., Bell, A. V., Demps, K., Frost, K., Hillis, V., Mathew, S., Newton, E. K., Naar, N., Newson, L., et al. (2016) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x1400106x · Cited by 639
Ecology in an anthropogenic biosphere
Ellis, E. C. (2015) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1890/14-2274.1 · Cited by 632
Curry, O. S., Rowland, L. A., Van Lissa, C. J., Zlotowitz, S., McAlaney, J., & Whitehouse, H. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.014 · Cited by 528
Metadata
- Authors
- Pinker, S.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2010-05-05
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- supplement_2
- Pages
- 8993-8999
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2068858721
- Cited by
- 585
- References
- 72
- FWCI
- 573.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The cognitive niche: Coevolution of intelligence, sociality, and language. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0914630107
- The paper
- Pinker, S. (2010). The cognitive niche: Coevolution of intelligence, sociality, and language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0914630107
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.