Cited by 183Primate Behavior and EcologyLanguage and cultural evolutionEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Taking sociality seriously: the structure of multi-dimensional social networks as a source of information for individuals

Open access
Barrett, Louise, Henzi, S. Peter, Lusseau, David·2012·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Understanding human cognitive evolution, and that of the other primates, means taking sociality very seriously. For humans, this requires the recognition of the sociocultural and historical means by which human minds and selves are constructed, and how this gives rise to the reflexivity and ability to respond to novelty that characterize our species. For other, non-linguistic, primates we can answer some interesting questions by viewing social life as a feedback process, drawing on cybernetics and systems approaches and using social network neo-theory to test these ideas. Specifically, we show how social networks can be formalized as multi-dimensional objects, and use entropy measures to assess how networks respond to perturbation. We use simulations and natural ‘knock-outs’ in a free-ranging baboon troop to demonstrate that changes in interactions after social perturbations lead to a more certain social network, in which the outcomes of interactions are easier for members to predict. This new formalization of social networks provides a framework within which to predict network dynamics and evolution, helps us highlight how human and non-human social networks differ and has implications for theories of cognitive evolution.

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 · 10.1098/rstb.2012.0113

Cites

95 of 95 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?

  • There is no need to postulate a distinct set of 'cognitive' processes to fill the supposed gap between sensory reception and motor output.

    “In common with Barrett [33], I argue that there is no need to postulate a distinct set of ‘cognitive’ processes to fill the supposed gap between sensory reception and motor output.”

    From Embodied cognitive evolution and the cerebellum (2012) · cites this paper as [33]

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: 1

  1. [44]44. Box, G. E. P., Hunter, J. S. & Hunter, W. C. 2005 Statistics for Experimenters II . New York: Wiley.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barrett, L., Henzi, S. P., & Lusseau, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Lethbridge (CA)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
Corresponding author
Barrett, Louise
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2012-08-05
Volume
367
Issue
1599
Pages
2108-2118
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W1667006712
Cited by
183
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
18.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • Unisa Institutional Repository (University of South Africa) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Northeastern States Research Cooperative
  • Killam Trusts
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
social networks, primate sociality, baboons, social network structure, entropy measures, social network dynamics, cognitive evolution, reflexivity, novelty response, social feedback
MeSH terms
Animals, Cognition, Computer Simulation, Biological Evolution, Female, Grooming, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Papio, Social Behavior, Spatial Behavior, Ecosystem, Feedback, Psychological, Theory of Mind, Social Networking

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