Cultural selection drives the evolution of human communication systems

Monica Tamariz, T. Mark Ellison, Dale J. Barr, Nicolas Fay*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract / Description of output

Human communication systems evolve culturally, but the evolutionary mechanisms that drive this evolutionare notwell understood. Against a baseline that communication variants spread in a population following neutral evolutionary dynamics (also known as drift models), we tested the role of two cultural selection models: coordination- and content-biased. We constructed a parametrized mixed probabilistic model of the spread of communicative variants in four 8-person laboratory micro-societies engaged in a simple communication game. We found that selectionist models, working in combination, explain the majority of the empirical data. The best-fitting parameter setting includes an egocentric bias and a content bias, suggesting that participants retained their own previously used communicative variants unless they encountered a superior (content-biased) variant, in which case it was adopted. This novel pattern of results suggests that (i) a theory of the cultural evolution of human communication systems must integrate selectionist models and (ii) human communication systems are functionally adaptive complex systems.

Original languageEnglish
Article number20140488
Number of pages6
JournalProceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences
Volume281
Issue number1788
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 25 Jun 2014

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • cultural evolution
  • language evolution
  • drift
  • coordination bias
  • content bias
  • selection
  • LANGUAGE EVOLUTION
  • RANDOM DRIFT
  • COORDINATION
  • EMERGENCE
  • TRANSMISSION
  • DIVERSITY
  • EXPANSION
  • LEARNERS
  • DIALOGUE
  • ORIGINS

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cultural selection drives the evolution of human communication systems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this