Review. Theoretical and empirical evidence for the impact of inductive biases on cultural evolution.
The question of how much the outcomes of cultural evolution are shaped by the cognitive capacities of human learners has been explored in several disciplines, including psychology, anthropology and linguistics. We address this question through a detailed investigation of transmission chains, in which each person passes information to another along a chain. We review mathematical and empirical evidence that shows that under general conditions, and across experimental paradigms, the information passed along transmission chains will be affected by the inductive biases of the people involved-the constraints on learning and memory, which influence conclusions from limited data. The mathematical analysis considers the case where each person is a rational Bayesian agent. The empirical work consists of behavioural experiments in which human participants are shown to operate in the manner predicted by the Bayesian framework. Specifically, in situations in which each person's response is used to determine the data seen by the next person, people converge on concepts consistent with their inductive biases irrespective of the information seen by the first member of the chain. We then relate the Bayesian analysis of transmission chains to models of biological evolution, clarifying how chains of individuals correspond to population-level models and how selective forces can be incorporated into our models. Taken together, these results indicate how laboratory studies of transmission chains can provide information about the dynamics of cultural evolution and illustrate that inductive biases can have a significant impact on these dynamics.
Griffiths
Thomas L
TL
Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-1650, USA. tom_griffiths@berkeley.edu
Kalish
Michael L
ML
Lewandowsky
Stephan
S
D001499:Bayes Theorem; D003071:Cognition / Q000502:physiology*; D003468:Cultural Evolution; D006801:Humans; D033181:Information Dissemination; D007858:Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D008568:Memory / Q000502:physiology; D008962:Models, Theoretical
J Theor Biol. 2003 Apr 7;221(3):445-57
12642119
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Apr;14(2):288-94
17694915
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Mar 20;104(12):5241-5
17360393
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3477-88
18799418
Psychol Rev. 2004 Oct;111(4):1072-99
15482074
Psychon Bull Rev. 1997 Jun;4(2):145-66
21331823
Cogn Sci. 2005 Sep 10;29(5):737-67
21702792
Artif Life. 2003 Fall;9(4):371-86
14761257
Cogn Sci. 2007 May 6;31(3):441-80
21635304
Artif Life. 2002;8(1):25-54
12020420
Nature. 2000 Oct 5;407(6804):630-3
11034211
Cogn Psychol. 2005 Dec;51(4):334-84
16168981
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
Science. 2001 Jan 5;291(5501):114-8
11141560
IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1984 Jun;6(6):721-41
22499653
Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Jul;7(7):308-312
12860189
Psychol Bull. 2007 Sep;133(5):761-79
17723029
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3591-603
18801718
Science. 2004 Sep 17;305(5691):1779-82
15375269
Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Aug;24(4):629-40; discussion 652-791
12048947
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3529-39
18799419
Nature. 2002 Jun 6;417(6889):611-7
12050656
Cogn Sci. 2007 Nov 12;31(6):961-87
21635324
Cogn Sci. 2008 Jan 2;32(1):68-107
21635332
Psychol Rev. 2007 Apr;114(2):211-44
17500626
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3489-501
18801720
Mem Cognit. 1994 May;22(3):352-69
8007837
Psychol Rev. 1992 Oct;99(4):605-32
1454901