Abstract
In recent years, the phenomenon of cumulative cultural evolution (CCE) has become the focus of major research interest in biology, psychology and anthropology. Some researchers argue that CCE is unique to humans and underlies our extraordinary evolutionary success as a species. Others claim to have found CCE in non-human species. Yet others remain sceptical that CCE is even important for explaining human behavioural diversity and complexity. These debates are hampered by multiple and often ambiguous definitions of CCE. Here, we review how researchers define, use and test CCE. We identify a core set of criteria for CCE which are both necessary and sufficient, and may be found in non-human species. We also identify a set of extended criteria that are observed in human CCE but not, to date, in other species. Different socio-cognitive mechanisms may underlie these different criteria. We reinterpret previous theoretical models and observational and experimental studies of both human and non-human species in light of these more fine-grained criteria. Finally, we discuss key issues surrounding information, fitness and cognition. We recommend that researchers are more explicit about what components of CCE they are testing and claiming to demonstrate.
Highlights
Anthropologists, biologists and psychologists have long been engaged in a search to discover the traits that make us uniquely human
We suggest that the minimum requirements for a population to exhibit cumulative cultural evolution (CCE) are (i) a change in behaviour, typically due to asocial learning, followed by (ii) the transfer via social learning of that novel or modified behaviour to other individuals or groups, where (iii) the learned behaviour causes an improvement in performance, which is a proxy of genetic and/or cultural fitness, with (iv) the previous three steps repeated in a manner that generates sequential improvement over time
We can contrast our core CCE criteria with the following cases of non-CCE which do not fulfil the criteria: (a) asocial or collective learning with no social learning beyond the immediate individual or group, which would produce improvement in performance that is lost when individuals die or groups disband, (b) improvement via genetic adaptation by natural selection, where the increase in fitness is via beneficial genetic mutations and the transmission is genetic and (c) cultural evolution that is non-cumulative, where fitness-neutral learned behaviours are transmitted via social learning
Summary
Anthropologists, biologists and psychologists have long been engaged in a search to discover the traits that make us uniquely human. Deny any meaningful role for culture in generating human behavioural diversity, instead focusing on how behaviour is generated by genetic programmes that evoke different behaviour in different environments [24,25] According to this view, complex behaviour arises from cumulative genetic evolution plus sophisticated genetically evolved individual cognition [26], not CCE. Complex behaviour arises from cumulative genetic evolution plus sophisticated genetically evolved individual cognition [26], not CCE These twin debates—one over whether CCE is found in non-human species and the other over the importance of CCE in explaining human ecological success—are hampered by the multiple ways in which CCE is used and defined. We recommend that researchers are clearer about which criteria they are studying and avoid treating CCE as a unitary rubicon separating human and nonhuman species
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
