Review. The multiple roles of cultural transmission experiments in understanding human cultural evolution.
In this paper, we explore how experimental studies of cultural transmission in adult humans can address general questions regarding the 'who, what, when and how' of human cultural transmission, and consequently inform a theory of human cultural evolution. Three methods are discussed. The transmission chain method, in which information is passed along linear chains of participants, has been used to identify content biases in cultural transmission. These concern the kind of information that is transmitted. Several such candidate content biases have now emerged from the experimental literature. The replacement method, in which participants in groups are gradually replaced or moved across groups, has been used to study phenomena such as cumulative cultural evolution, cultural group selection and cultural innovation. The closed-group method, in which participants learn in groups with no replacement, has been used to explore issues such as who people choose to learn from and when they learn culturally as opposed to individually. A number of the studies reviewed here have received relatively little attention within their own disciplines, but we suggest that these, and future experimental studies of cultural transmission that build on them, can play an important role in a broader science of cultural evolution.
Mesoudi
Alex
A
Department of Social and Developmental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge, UK. am786@cam.ac.uk
Whiten
Andrew
A
D000328:Adult; D003468:Cultural Evolution; D006801:Humans; D033181:Information Dissemination; D012106:Research; D012919:Social Behavior
Child Dev. 2007 Mar-Apr;78(2):474-92
17381785
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Apr;14(2):288-94
17694915
Behav Brain Sci. 2006 Aug;29(4):329-47; discussion 347-83
17094820
Learn Behav. 2004 Feb;32(1):4-14
15161136
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3477-88
18799418
Nature. 1999 Jun 17;399(6737):682-5
10385119
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001 Dec;81(6):1028-41
11761305
Genetica. 2001;112-113:9-32
11838790
J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1961 May;62:649-58
14450695
Br J Soc Psychol. 2000 Dec;39 Pt 4:521-35
11190683
Hum Nat. 2001 Dec;12(4):351-81
26192412
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3541-51
18799417
Behav Genet. 2007 Sep;37(5):639-47
17566859
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Mar 18;100(6):3531-5
12631700
J Evol Biol. 2006 Jan;19(1):35-41
16405574
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3529-39
18799419
Cogn Sci. 2008 Jan 2;32(1):68-107
21635332
Br J Psychol. 2006 Aug;97(Pt 3):405-23
16848951
Evolution. 2004 Jan;58(1):1-11
15058714
Behav Brain Sci. 2005 Dec;28(6):795-815; discussion 815-55
16372952
Behav Brain Sci. 1998 Aug;21(4):547-69; discussion 569-609
10097021
Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Jan;8(1):40-6
14697402
Science. 2006 Apr 7;312(5770):108-11
16601192
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3503-14
18801717
Cogn Sci. 2006 May 6;30(3):531-53
21702824
Psychol Sci. 2008 Feb;19(2):176-80
18271866
Anim Cogn. 2008 Jul;11(3):449-56
18204869
Br J Psychol Gen Sect. 1949 Mar;39(3):142-7
18127236
Learn Behav. 2004 Feb;32(1):36-52
15161139