Cited by 229

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Transmission fidelity is the key to the build-up of cumulative culture

Lewis, Hannah M., Laland, Kevin N.·2012·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Many animals have socially transmitted behavioural traditions, but human culture appears unique in that it is cumulative, i.e. human cultural traits increase in diversity and complexity over time. It is often suggested that high-fidelity cultural transmission is necessary for cumulative culture to occur through refinement, a process known as ‘ratcheting’, but this hypothesis has never been formally evaluated. We discuss processes of information transmission and loss of traits from a cognitive viewpoint alongside other cultural processes of novel invention (generation of entirely new traits), modification (refinement of existing traits) and combination (bringing together two established traits to generate a new trait). We develop a simple cultural transmission model that does not assume major evolutionary changes (e.g. in brain architecture) and show that small changes in the fidelity with which information is passed between individuals can lead to cumulative culture. In comparison, modification and combination have a lesser influence on, and novel invention appears unimportant to, the ratcheting process. Our findings support the idea that high-fidelity transmission is the key driver of human cumulative culture, and that progress in cumulative culture depends more on trait combination than novel invention or trait modification.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.2012.0119

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

  • High-fidelity information transmission is necessary for cumulative culture.

    “Theoretical analyses have established that high-fidelity information transmission is necessary for cumulative culture (Lewis & Laland, 2012)”

    From The origins of language in teaching (2017) · cites this paper as Lewis & Laland, 2012

  • The imitation-emulation volunteers produced flakes with thinner platforms, while the verbal and gestural communication groups produced thicker platforms more like the skilled knapper, which may indicate that more adequate percussion platforms were selected by these groups.

    “The imitation-emulation volunteers produced flakes with thinner platforms, while the flake platforms of the verbal and gestural communication groups were thicker, more like to those of the skilled knapper. This may indicate that more adequate percussion platforms were selected by these groups compared with the imitation-emulation knappers73.”

    From Teaching to make stone tools: new experimental evidence supporting a technological hypothesis for the origins of language (2017) · cites this paper as [73]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 65

  1. Tomasello M., 1994, The question of chimpanzee culture, Chimpanzee cultures, 301
  2. Fisher J., 1949, The opening of milk bottles by birds, Br. Birds, 42, 347
  3. Hinde R. A., 1951, Further observations on the opening of milk bottles by birds, Br. Birds, 44, 393
  4. 10.1007/BF01794457 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/S0065-3454(08)60393-9 · DOI
  6. Catchpole C. K., 1995, Bird song: biological themes and variations
  7. 10.1086/345825 · DOI
  8. 10.1126/science.1078004 · DOI
  9. 10.1038/21415 · DOI
  10. 10.1002/evan.10106 · DOI
  11. 10.1098/rspb.2002.2302 · DOI
  12. 10.1098/rstb.2009.0052 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1007/BF02692251 · DOI
  14. 10.1006/anbe.1993.1281 · DOI
  15. Stringer C., 2005, The complete world of human evolution
  16. 10.1038/nature09248 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6505(2000)9:1<17::AID-EVAN3>3.0.CO;2-A · DOI
  18. 10.1086/soutjanth.6.2.3628638 · DOI
  19. 10.1086/203705 · DOI
  20. 10.1515/9781400843602 · DOI
  21. 10.1006/jhev.2000.0435 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1038/380336a0 · DOI
  23. 10.1006/jhev.1993.1010 · DOI
  24. Bronowski J., 1973, The ascent of man
  25. Diamond J., 1997, Guns, germs and steel
  26. 10.1002/evan.10110 · DOI
  27. Boyd R., 1996, Why culture is common, but cultural evolution is rare, Proc. Br. Acad., 88, 77
  28. 10.1126/science.1213969 · DOI
  29. 10.1016/S0003-3472(87)80262-2 · DOI
  30. 10.1016/0003-3472(95)80001-8 · DOI
  31. 10.1023/A:1012069500899 · DOI
  32. 10.2307/4128416 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Tomasello M., 1999, The cultural origins of human cognition
  34. Galef B. G., 2009, The question of animal culture, 222, 10.2307/j.ctv322v4wf.13 · DOI
  35. 10.1098/rstb.2012.0114 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Dawkins R., 1976, The selfish gene
  37. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.03.009 · DOI
  38. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0313 · DOI
  39. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0132 · DOI
  40. Boyd R., 1985, Culture and the evolutionary process
  41. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198526223.003.0001 · DOI
  42. 10.1556/JEP.2007.1009 · DOI
  43. 10.1016/j.tpb.2009.04.006 · DOI
  44. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.04.009 · DOI
  45. 10.1098/rstb.2012.0118 · DOI
  46. 10.1006/jeth.1997.2347 · DOI
  47. 10.3758/BF03196002 · DOI · Paper page
  48. 10.1098/rspb.2011.1172 · DOI
  49. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.04.005 · DOI
  50. 10.1093/beheco/arp016 · DOI
  51. 10.1093/beheco/arq025 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.tpb.2008.04.007 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.1016/j.tree.2008.05.008 · DOI
  54. Bickerton A., 2010, Adam's tongue
  55. 10.1037/0735-7036.112.3.270 · DOI
  56. 10.1037/0735-7036.116.3.277 · DOI
  57. 10.1037/0097-7403.31.3.289 · DOI
  58. 10.1126/science.1146282 · DOI · Paper page
  59. 10.1098/rstb.2009.0069 · DOI
  60. 10.1163/156853702320281836 · DOI
  61. 10.1207/s15326934crj0804_3 · DOI
  62. Basalla G., 1988, The evolution of technology
  63. Boyd R., 2005, The origin and evolution of culture, 10.1093/oso/9780195165241.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  64. 10.1017/S0002731600047338 · DOI
  65. 10.1098/rspb.2009.0724 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Lewis, H. M., & Laland, K. N.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2012-08-05
Volume
367
Issue
1599
Pages
2171-2180
ISSN
  • 0962-8436
  • 1471-2970
Cited by
229
References
3
Language
en

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