What Makes the Human Brain Different?
Abstract
Despite decades of research that has revolutionized the neurosciences, efforts to explain the major features of human brain evolution are still mostly based on superficial gross neuroanatomical features (e.g. size, sulcal patterns) and on theories of selection for high-level functions that lack precise neurobiological predictions (e.g. general intelligence, innate grammar). Beyond its large size we still lack an account of what makes a human brain different. However, advances in comparative neuroanatomy, developmental biology, and genetics have radically changed our understanding of brain development. These data challenge classic ideas about brain size, intelligence, and the addition of new functions, such as language, and they provide tools with which we can test hypotheses about how human brains diverge from other primate brains.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
If primates have big brains merely because they have small bodies, one cannot presume this represents an evolutionary trend driven by cognitive demands.
“if primates have big brains merely because they have small bodies, we cannot presume that this represents an evolutionary trend driven by cognitive demands”
From The human brain in numbers: a linearly scaled-up primate brain (2009) · cites this paper as Deacon, 1997
Compared to other mammalian orders, primate encephalization results from a shift in postcranial growth processes, not a modification of brain growth.
“compared to other mammalian orders, primate encephalization is the result of a shift in postcranial growth processes, not a modification of brain growth (Deacon, 1997).”
From The human brain in numbers: a linearly scaled-up primate brain (2009) · cites this paper as Deacon, 1997
The human brain continues to grow as though in a larger body.
“the human brain exhibits a further modification in that it continues to grow as though in a larger body (Deacon, 1997).”
From The human brain in numbers: a linearly scaled-up primate brain (2009) · cites this paper as Deacon, 1997
Support for a dissociation between brain and body growth comes from development, where brain growth precedes body growth.
“Supportive evidence comes from the dissociation between brain and body growth in development, in which the former actually precedes the latter (reviewed in Deacon, 1997)”
From The human brain in numbers: a linearly scaled-up primate brain (2009) · cites this paper as Deacon, 1997
Cites
Quantitative growth and development of human brain
Dobbing, J., & Sands, J. (1973) · Archives of Disease in Childhood · doi:10.1136/adc.48.10.757 · Cited by 1,442 · see citing works
Regressive Events in Neurogenesis
Cowan, W. M., Fawcett, J. W., O'Leary, D. D. M., & Stanfield, B. B. (1984) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.6474175 · Cited by 1,316 · see citing works
Rethinking mammalian brain evolution
DEACON, T. W. (1990) · American Zoologist · doi:10.1093/icb/30.3.629 · Cited by 245 · see citing works
Self-citationBrain Size Allometry Ontogeny and Phylogeny
Martin, R. D., & Harvey, P. H. (1985) · Size and Scaling in Primate Biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3647-9_8 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The human brain in numbers: a linearly scaled-up primate brain
Herculano-Houzel, S. (2009) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/neuro.09.031.2009 · Cited by 1,778 · see citing works
“This latter possibility of a dissociation between brain and body development in evolution (which might be only circumstantially, and not causally, related) constitutes a fi nal criticism to the usefulness of the EQ as an index of “brain” evolution in comparative studies: indeed, the emphasis on the body-centered EQ ov…”
InfluentialHerculano-Houzel, S. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1201895109 · Cited by 726 · see citing works
Evolution and ontogeny of stress response to social challenges in the human child
FLINN, M. (2006) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2006.02.003 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Comparative neurotoxicity screening in human iPSC-derived neural stem cells, neurons and astrocytes
Pei, Y., Peng, J., Behl, M., Sipes, N. S., Shockley, K. R., Rao, M. S., Tice, R. R., & Zeng, X. (2016) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.07.048 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
- Authors
- Deacon, T. W.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Deacon, Terrence W.
- ORCID
- Deacon, Terrence W.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Anthropology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 1997-10
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 337-357
- ISSN
- 0084-6570 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-4290
- OpenAlex
- W2139401317
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 0.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annual Review of Anthropology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
- Keywords
- human brain evolution, comparative neuroanatomy, brain size, intelligence, language evolution, primate brain, brain development, developmental biology, human uniqueness
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
