| Title |
Imitation Is Necessary for Cumulative Cultural Evolution in an Unfamiliar, Opaque Task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Nature, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12110-014-9192-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Helen Wasielewski |
| Abstract |
Imitation, the replication of observed behaviors, has been proposed as the crucial social learning mechanism for the generation of humanlike cultural complexity. To date, the single published experimental microsociety study that tested this hypothesis found no advantage for imitation. In contrast, the current paper reports data in support of the imitation hypothesis. Participants in "microsociety" groups built weight-bearing devices from reed and clay. Each group was assigned to one of four conditions: three social learning conditions and one asocial learning control condition. Groups able to observe other participants building their devices, in contrast to groups that saw only completed devices, show evidence of successive improvement. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that imitation is required for cumulative cultural evolution. This study adds crucial data for understanding why imitation is needed for cultural accumulation, a central defining feature of our species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 33% |
| Japan | 2 | 8% |
| Italy | 2 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Denmark | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 63% |
| Scientists | 8 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 15% |
| Researcher | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 August 2021.
All research outputs
#2,376,283
of 25,460,285 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#186
of 546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,744
of 329,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,460,285 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 546 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,763 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.