Cited by 62Language and cultural evolutionLinguistics, Language Diversity, and IdentityEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

The dynamics of norm change in the cultural evolution of language

Open access
Amato, Roberta, Lacasa, Lucas, Díaz-Guilera, Albert, Baronchelli, Andrea·2018·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Social conventions, such as shaking hands or dressing formally, allow us to coordinate smoothly and, once established, appear to be natural. But what happens when a new convention replaces an old one? This question has remained largely unanswered so far, due to the lack of suitable data. Here, we investigate the process of norm change by looking at 2,541 linguistic norm shifts occurring over the last two centuries in English and Spanish. We identify different patterns of norm adoption depending on whether the change is spontaneous or driven by a centralized institution, and we propose a simple model that reproduces all of the empirical observations. These results shed light on the cultural evolution of linguistic norms and human collective behavior.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1721059115

Cites

65 of 65 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?

  • Other studies indicate minorities as small as 0.3% can trigger substantial linguistic and social changes.

    “However, real-world observations reveal a wider range, with some studies proposing 30 to 40% for gender conventions in corporate leadership (25, 48), and others indicating that minorities as small as 0.3% can trigger substantial linguistic and social changes (29, 49–51).”

    From Emergent social conventions and collective bias in LLM populations (2025) · cites this paper as [51]

    The Model and Unregulated evolution sections link small groups of committed users to the success of new linguistic forms. But the 0.3% figure (c = 0.003) appears in Intervention of informal institutions as a fitted commitment parameter supporting the old British spelling, not as a minority shown to trigger change; the paper also does not establish that figure for social changes generally. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. Hodges RE (1964) A short history of spelling reform in the united states. The Phi Delta Kappan 45(7):330-332.
  2. M Jean-Baptiste, Y K Shen, A P Aiden, A Veres, M K Gray, J P Pickett, D Hoiberg, D Clancy, P Norvig, J Orwant, et al. Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. science, 331(6014):176-182, 2011.
  3. Eitan Adam Pechenick, Christopher M Danforth, and Peter Sheridan Dodds. Characterizing the google books corpus: Strong limits to inferences of socio-cultural and linguistic evolution. PloS one, 10(10):e0137041, 2015. Dataset composition See complete SI on the PNAS website.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amato, R., Lacasa, L., Díaz-Guilera, A., & Baronchelli, A.
Affiliations
  • Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • Departament de Física de la Matèria Condensada, Universitat de Barcelona, E-08028 Barcelona, Spain;
  • City, University of London (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2018-08-02
Volume
115
Issue
33
Pages
8260-8265
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2885347281
Cited by
62
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
34.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (FIS2012-38266-C02-02, FIS2015-71582-C2-2-P)
  • Generalitat de Catalunya (2014SGR608)
  • RCUK | Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/P01660X/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
norm change, cultural evolution of language, spelling rules, lexical norms, English language, Spanish language, language change, formal institutions, informal authority, evolutionary models, collective behavior, historical corpora
MeSH terms
Cultural Evolution, Humans, Language, Social Norms

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