Understanding hunter–gatherer cultural evolution needs network thinking

Hunter–gatherers past and present live in complex societies, and the structure of these can be assessed using social networks. We outline how the integration of new evidence from cultural evolution experiments, computer simulations, ethnography, and archaeology open new research horizons to understand the role of social networks in cultural evolution. Hunter–gatherers past and present live in complex societies, and the structure of these can be assessed using social networks. We outline how the integration of new evidence from cultural evolution experiments, computer simulations, ethnography, and archaeology open new research horizons to understand the role of social networks in cultural evolution. Cultural evolution: It is time for thinking about social networksSocial networks, referred to here as a structure in which individuals and groups of individuals are connected to each other through social ties, play a central but not yet well-understood role in human cultural evolution. Here, we advocate for the adoption of a ‘network thinking’ (see Glossary) perspective in cultural evolutionary research when dealing with past and present hunter–gatherer populations. This approach necessarily requires (i) recognizing that social learning processes have involved the transmission of information throughout different levels of social interaction among individuals from the same residential group and between members of different residential groups; therefore, this information flow is embedded in large and complex social networks; (ii) understanding that population size scales up the complexity of these social networks from interactions among few individuals to direct and indirect interactions among hundreds of individuals in much larger metapopulations; and (iii) investigating the relationship between past social network dynamics and cultural change using archaeological datasets.We argue the adoption of ‘network thinking’ in cultural evolution can only be adequately explored through a multidisciplinary combination of data, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks from archaeology, evolutionary anthropology, psychology, and network science. Specifically, this includes the evidence available from the archaeological record, ethnographic studies, computer simulations, and cultural evolution experiments on one side and the theoretical perspectives developed in cultural evolutionary and complex systems theories on the other. Here, we show how recent research has shifted the conceptual background of social connectivity in hunter–gatherer cultural evolution and discuss three major areas for prospective research: (i) the application of social network analysis to the archaeological record, (ii) the introduction of conceptual frameworks from network theory (Figure 1), and (iii) the interdependence between social networks and cultural evolution.New perspectives on the role of social connectivity in hunter–gatherer cultural transmissionThe core principle of cultural evolutionary theory is that individuals learn through a combination of individual and social learning. Under certain conditions, individuals' learning strategies can result in cumulative culture, which is recognized by the presence of traits that could not be invented by a single individual and that are gradually improved over time due to the inheritance of knowledge and know-how from previous generations. We view social networks as a central but still understudied component of cultural evolution because, by definition, cultural transmission is information flow and retention through structured populations at multiple scales.Recent research has applied social network analysis to explore the influence of social connectivity on cultural evolution using laboratory experiments, computer simulations, and ethnographic data [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar, 2.Garg K. et al.Hunter-gatherer foraging networks promote information transmission.R. Soc. Open Sci. 2021; 8211324Crossref Google Scholar, 3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar]. Cultural evolution experiments in which participants can learn from each other to develop complex artifacts have demonstrated that populations subdivided into partially isolated subgroups produce more diverse cultural traits than fully connected populations and reach higher levels of cultural complexity when innovation depends on cultural diversity [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar]. Computational modelling has investigated the effect of different human mobility strategies on information transmission through social networks and found that central place foraging, in which hunter–gatherers forage and bring food back to the campsite, improve the dissemination of social information in large populations [2.Garg K. et al.Hunter-gatherer foraging networks promote information transmission.R. Soc. Open Sci. 2021; 8211324Crossref Google Scholar].Complementing these approaches, studies simulating cultural evolution over real networks from extant hunter–gatherer communities have shown that social structures characterised by multiple levels of clustering of households within camps and camps within metapopulations can accelerate cultural evolution [3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar]. Furthermore, features such as coresidence, cooperation with unrelated individuals, multilocality, fluid sociality, and high between-camp mobility might have had a major influence on the cognitive mechanisms (e.g., high-fidelity transmission, innovation, teaching, and combinatorial innovation) underlying cumulative cultural evolution. This research has significantly contributed to replacing the long-held view of hunter–gatherers living in small-scale societies by a new perspective that highlights how small coresidence groups are dynamically connected to much larger populations, forming expansive networks of social interaction at large spatial scales [3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar,4.Hamilton M.J. Collective computation and the emergence of hunter-gatherer small worlds.J. Soc. Comput. 2022; 3: 18-37Crossref Scopus (2) Google Scholar]. In spite of contributing to a paradigm shift, experimental and ethnographic studies do not have the time depth to reveal how these changes might have impacted cultural evolution across generations. Archaeological data can step in here (Figure 2) .Figure 2Network dynamics and archaeological social networks.Show full captionThe left different of of social as social interactions in which of is and are and traits in social learning The central the of social networks using archaeological The a theoretical social network through three time and and of such dynamics in of cultural evolutionary we the social by within a that the and of processes of social of at the social network than at and the among the is higher within each than at This information and that can result in cultural at the network is significantly and is and are within and across This the of cultural a by which in connected populations can to the of cultural social network analysis to the archaeological archaeological left by past hunter–gatherers perspectives on the relationship between of social interaction and cultural evolution. From the archaeological evidence is to networks at social network analysis to the hunter–gatherer archaeological have on a of processes of cultural network and the of and in to et small of Sci. Scopus Google by Archaeological on and Google and application of social network analysis to archaeological the of the record, with time scales of and and research and are to the of of to archaeological networks, as as in the of different and modelling to and from the of network when data over when the archaeological into for the spatial and dynamics of of recent in evolutionary archaeology in new of archaeological as as and spatial modelling open new for of social network analysis to cultural evolutionary the of cultural using cultural evolutionary to population and network structure through et in archaeology with data requires cultural evolutionary Scopus Google Scholar]. recent in modelling have new into the of changes in population size and dynamics at scales A. from large of and 2020; Scopus Google Scholar]. of information systems and modelling a more of the that and play in the of social networks in the archaeological analysis and the of Sci. Scopus Google Scholar]. the of archaeological and through data new data and the application of social network analysis to the hunter–gatherer archaeological cultural evolutionary processes from a population such as the of new by social the of and the relationship between cultural changes with and and population social networks and cultural evolution the influence of social connectivity on cultural evolution is but is only one side of the we are We to understand how cultural transmission might in the dynamics of social recent research the presence of between network dynamics and cultural transmission and highlights the role such play in cultural evolution [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google M. Cultural network PubMed Scopus Google Scholar]. connectivity through population cultural transmission cultural might be by social This between network dynamics and cultural transmission is complex and to across multiple scales and with interactions of multiple (e.g., and that have not yet fully explored in evolutionary archaeology the evolutionary and Sci. A. 2021; PubMed Scopus Google Scholar]. and ethnographic studies can to this on mechanisms underlying social network on these approaches, as as with archaeological data of different network have developed a of and to explore the dynamics of networks and with information transmission Google Scholar]. We can this knowledge to evolutionary of the interdependence of social structure and cultural change in hunter–gatherer for ‘network for ‘network thinking’ in hunter–gatherer cultural evolution is on evidence for the relationship between social connectivity and cultural change by recent and experimental research is to show how hunter–gatherer cumulative the of social structures in the past is to fully understand cultural evolution. using archaeological data to and past social networks, we can into how changes in social connectivity with human cultural in of the of and the to and cultural and interactions among individuals with collective and can be to these We that this application of network thinking improve understanding of the between human social structure and cultural Cultural evolution: It is time for thinking about social networksSocial networks, referred to here as a structure in which individuals and groups of individuals are connected to each other through social ties, play a central but not yet well-understood role in human cultural evolution. Here, we advocate for the adoption of a ‘network thinking’ (see Glossary) perspective in cultural evolutionary research when dealing with past and present hunter–gatherer populations. This approach necessarily requires (i) recognizing that social learning processes have involved the transmission of information throughout different levels of social interaction among individuals from the same residential group and between members of different residential groups; therefore, this information flow is embedded in large and complex social networks; (ii) understanding that population size scales up the complexity of these social networks from interactions among few individuals to direct and indirect interactions among hundreds of individuals in much larger metapopulations; and (iii) investigating the relationship between past social network dynamics and cultural change using archaeological datasets.We argue the adoption of ‘network thinking’ in cultural evolution can only be adequately explored through a multidisciplinary combination of data, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks from archaeology, evolutionary anthropology, psychology, and network science. Specifically, this includes the evidence available from the archaeological record, ethnographic studies, computer simulations, and cultural evolution experiments on one side and the theoretical perspectives developed in cultural evolutionary and complex systems theories on the other. Here, we show how recent research has shifted the conceptual background of social connectivity in hunter–gatherer cultural evolution and discuss three major areas for prospective research: (i) the application of social network analysis to the archaeological record, (ii) the introduction of conceptual frameworks from network theory (Figure 1), and (iii) the interdependence between social networks and cultural evolution. networks, referred to here as a structure in which individuals and groups of individuals are connected to each other through social ties, play a central but not yet well-understood role in human cultural evolution. Here, we advocate for the adoption of a ‘network thinking’ (see Glossary) perspective in cultural evolutionary research when dealing with past and present hunter–gatherer populations. This approach necessarily requires (i) recognizing that social learning processes have involved the transmission of information throughout different levels of social interaction among individuals from the same residential group and between members of different residential groups; therefore, this information flow is embedded in large and complex social networks; (ii) understanding that population size scales up the complexity of these social networks from interactions among few individuals to direct and indirect interactions among hundreds of individuals in much larger metapopulations; and (iii) investigating the relationship between past social network dynamics and cultural change using archaeological We argue the adoption of ‘network thinking’ in cultural evolution can only be adequately explored through a multidisciplinary combination of data, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks from archaeology, evolutionary anthropology, psychology, and network science. Specifically, this includes the evidence available from the archaeological record, ethnographic studies, computer simulations, and cultural evolution experiments on one side and the theoretical perspectives developed in cultural evolutionary and complex systems theories on the other. Here, we show how recent research has shifted the conceptual background of social connectivity in hunter–gatherer cultural evolution and discuss three major areas for prospective research: (i) the application of social network analysis to the archaeological record, (ii) the introduction of conceptual frameworks from network theory (Figure 1), and (iii) the interdependence between social networks and cultural evolution. perspectives on the role of social connectivity in hunter–gatherer cultural transmissionThe core principle of cultural evolutionary theory is that individuals learn through a combination of individual and social learning. Under certain conditions, individuals' learning strategies can result in cumulative culture, which is recognized by the presence of traits that could not be invented by a single individual and that are gradually improved over time due to the inheritance of knowledge and know-how from previous generations. We view social networks as a central but still understudied component of cultural evolution because, by definition, cultural transmission is information flow and retention through structured populations at multiple scales.Recent research has applied social network analysis to explore the influence of social connectivity on cultural evolution using laboratory experiments, computer simulations, and ethnographic data [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar, 2.Garg K. et al.Hunter-gatherer foraging networks promote information transmission.R. Soc. Open Sci. 2021; 8211324Crossref Google Scholar, 3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar]. Cultural evolution experiments in which participants can learn from each other to develop complex artifacts have demonstrated that populations subdivided into partially isolated subgroups produce more diverse cultural traits than fully connected populations and reach higher levels of cultural complexity when innovation depends on cultural diversity [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar]. Computational modelling has investigated the effect of different human mobility strategies on information transmission through social networks and found that central place foraging, in which hunter–gatherers forage and bring food back to the campsite, improve the dissemination of social information in large populations [2.Garg K. et al.Hunter-gatherer foraging networks promote information transmission.R. Soc. Open Sci. 2021; 8211324Crossref Google Scholar].Complementing these approaches, studies simulating cultural evolution over real networks from extant hunter–gatherer communities have shown that social structures characterised by multiple levels of clustering of households within camps and camps within metapopulations can accelerate cultural evolution [3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar]. Furthermore, features such as coresidence, cooperation with unrelated individuals, multilocality, fluid sociality, and high between-camp mobility might have had a major influence on the cognitive mechanisms (e.g., high-fidelity transmission, innovation, teaching, and combinatorial innovation) underlying cumulative cultural evolution. This research has significantly contributed to replacing the long-held view of hunter–gatherers living in small-scale societies by a new perspective that highlights how small coresidence groups are dynamically connected to much larger populations, forming expansive networks of social interaction at large spatial scales [3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar,4.Hamilton M.J. Collective computation and the emergence of hunter-gatherer small worlds.J. Soc. Comput. 2022; 3: 18-37Crossref Scopus (2) Google Scholar]. In spite of contributing to a paradigm shift, experimental and ethnographic studies do not have the time depth to reveal how these changes might have impacted cultural evolution across generations. Archaeological data can step in here (Figure 2) The core principle of cultural evolutionary theory is that individuals learn through a combination of individual and social learning. Under certain conditions, individuals' learning strategies can result in cumulative culture, which is recognized by the presence of traits that could not be invented by a single individual and that are gradually improved over time due to the inheritance of knowledge and know-how from previous generations. We view social networks as a central but still understudied component of cultural evolution because, by definition, cultural transmission is information flow and retention through structured populations at multiple research has applied social network analysis to explore the influence of social connectivity on cultural evolution using laboratory experiments, computer simulations, and ethnographic data [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar, 2.Garg K. et al.Hunter-gatherer foraging networks promote information transmission.R. Soc. Open Sci. 2021; 8211324Crossref Google Scholar, 3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar]. Cultural evolution experiments in which participants can learn from each other to develop complex artifacts have demonstrated that populations subdivided into partially isolated subgroups produce more diverse cultural traits than fully connected populations and reach higher levels of cultural complexity when innovation depends on cultural diversity [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar]. Computational modelling has investigated the effect of different human mobility strategies on information transmission through social networks and found that central place foraging, in which hunter–gatherers forage and bring food back to the campsite, improve the dissemination of social information in large populations [2.Garg K. et al.Hunter-gatherer foraging networks promote information transmission.R. Soc. Open Sci. 2021; 8211324Crossref Google Scholar]. these approaches, studies simulating cultural evolution over real networks from extant hunter–gatherer communities have shown that social structures characterised by multiple levels of clustering of households within camps and camps within metapopulations can accelerate cultural evolution [3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar]. Furthermore, features such as coresidence, cooperation with unrelated individuals, multilocality, fluid sociality, and high between-camp mobility might have had a major influence on the cognitive mechanisms (e.g., high-fidelity transmission, innovation, teaching, and combinatorial innovation) underlying cumulative cultural evolution. This research has significantly contributed to replacing the long-held view of hunter–gatherers living in small-scale societies by a new perspective that highlights how small coresidence groups are dynamically connected to much larger populations, forming expansive networks of social interaction at large spatial scales [3.Migliano A.B. Vinicius L. The origins of human cumulative culture: From the foraging niche to collective intelligence.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2022; 37720200317Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar,4.Hamilton M.J. Collective computation and the emergence of hunter-gatherer small worlds.J. Soc. Comput. 2022; 3: 18-37Crossref Scopus (2) Google Scholar]. In spite of contributing to a paradigm shift, experimental and ethnographic studies do not have the time depth to reveal how these changes might have impacted cultural evolution across generations. Archaeological data can step in here (Figure 2) social network analysis to the archaeological archaeological left by past hunter–gatherers perspectives on the relationship between of social interaction and cultural evolution. From the archaeological evidence is to networks at social network analysis to the hunter–gatherer archaeological have on a of processes of cultural network and the of and in to et small of Sci. Scopus Google by Archaeological on and Google and application of social network analysis to archaeological the of the record, with time scales of and and research and are to the of of to archaeological networks, as as in the of different and modelling to and from the of network when data over when the archaeological into for the spatial and dynamics of of recent in evolutionary archaeology in new of archaeological as as and spatial modelling open new for of social network analysis to cultural evolutionary the of cultural using cultural evolutionary to population and network structure through et in archaeology with data requires cultural evolutionary Scopus Google Scholar]. recent in modelling have new into the of changes in population size and dynamics at scales A. from large of and 2020; Scopus Google Scholar]. of information systems and modelling a more of the that and play in the of social networks in the archaeological analysis and the of Sci. Scopus Google Scholar]. the of archaeological and through data new data and the application of social network analysis to the hunter–gatherer archaeological cultural evolutionary processes from a population such as the of new by social the of and the relationship between cultural changes with and and population The archaeological left by past hunter–gatherers perspectives on the relationship between of social interaction and cultural evolution. From the archaeological evidence is to networks at social network analysis to the hunter–gatherer archaeological have on a of processes of cultural network and the of and in to et small of Sci. Scopus Google by Archaeological on and Google and The application of social network analysis to archaeological the of the record, with time scales of and and research and are to the of of to archaeological networks, as as in the of different and modelling to and from the of network when data over when the archaeological into for the spatial and dynamics of networks. of recent in evolutionary archaeology in new of archaeological as as and spatial modelling open new for of social network analysis to cultural evolutionary the of cultural using cultural evolutionary to population and network structure through et in archaeology with data requires cultural evolutionary Scopus Google Scholar]. recent in modelling have new into the of changes in population size and dynamics at scales A. from large of and 2020; Scopus Google Scholar]. of information systems and modelling a more of the that and play in the of social networks in the archaeological analysis and the of Sci. Scopus Google Scholar]. the of archaeological and through data new data and In the application of social network analysis to the hunter–gatherer archaeological cultural evolutionary processes from a population such as the of new by social the of and the relationship between cultural changes with and and population social networks and cultural evolution the influence of social connectivity on cultural evolution is but is only one side of the we are We to understand how cultural transmission might in the dynamics of social recent research the presence of between network dynamics and cultural transmission and highlights the role such play in cultural evolution [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google M. Cultural network PubMed Scopus Google Scholar]. connectivity through population cultural transmission cultural might be by social This between network dynamics and cultural transmission is complex and to across multiple scales and with interactions of multiple (e.g., and that have not yet fully explored in evolutionary archaeology the evolutionary and Sci. A. 2021; PubMed Scopus Google Scholar]. and ethnographic studies can to this on mechanisms underlying social network on these approaches, as as with archaeological data of different network have developed a of and to explore the dynamics of networks and with information transmission Google Scholar]. We can this knowledge to evolutionary of the interdependence of social structure and cultural change in hunter–gatherer the influence of social connectivity on cultural evolution is but is only one side of the we are We to understand how cultural transmission might in the dynamics of social networks. recent research the presence of between network dynamics and cultural transmission and highlights the role such play in cultural evolution [1.Derex M. Mesoudi A. Cumulative cultural evolution within evolving population structures.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2020; 24: 654-667Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (26) Google M. Cultural network PubMed Scopus Google Scholar]. connectivity through population cultural transmission cultural might be by social This between network dynamics and cultural transmission is complex and to across multiple scales and with interactions of multiple (e.g., and that have not yet fully explored in evolutionary archaeology the evolutionary and Sci. A. 2021; PubMed Scopus Google Scholar]. and ethnographic studies can to this on mechanisms underlying social network on these approaches, as as with archaeological data of different network have developed a of and to explore the dynamics of networks and with information transmission Google Scholar]. We can this knowledge to evolutionary of the interdependence of social structure and cultural change in hunter–gatherer for ‘network for ‘network thinking’ in hunter–gatherer cultural evolution is on evidence for the relationship between social connectivity and cultural change by recent and experimental research is to show how hunter–gatherer cumulative the of social structures in the past is to fully understand cultural evolution. using archaeological data to and past social networks, we can into how changes in social connectivity with human cultural in of the of and the to and cultural and interactions among individuals with collective and can be to these We that this application of network thinking improve understanding of the between human social structure and cultural for ‘network thinking’ in hunter–gatherer cultural evolution is on evidence for the relationship between social connectivity and cultural change by recent and experimental research is to show how hunter–gatherer cumulative the of social structures in the past is to fully understand cultural evolution. using archaeological data to and past social networks, we can into how changes in social connectivity with human cultural in of the of and the to and cultural and interactions among individuals with collective and can be to these We that this application of network thinking improve understanding of the between human social structure and cultural This research has from the the and to from the from through the from the and the of are a of that and interactions among a of modelling can be applied to a of the of of a the and social learning of cultural traits from individual to individual and over such that the cultural traits improve in of a for over the and of that group to and and structure is the of social transmission processes over time and in to of to the of as populations isolated over that transmission over and a approach to the of cultural evolution in past and present hunter–gatherer It the frameworks from cultural evolution and complex systems theories to understand how social structure has cumulative cultural evolution and other of cultural evolutionary It on and from archaeology, evolutionary anthropology, psychology, and network science. a of to produce of of archaeological modelling is to produce about population and dynamics at the of investigating social structures through the of network and It structures in of individual collective such as and the network analysis a of to social networks and the relationship between the of in a network and the of different on the of artifacts and (e.g., and have than and of different on archaeological and This the and of found at archaeological and to of archaeological to past social networks (e.g., can the of past social the that of not

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.