Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Group size and cultural complexity

Abstract

Arising from M. Derex, M.-P. Beugin, B. Godelle & M. Raymond Nature 503, 389–391 (2013)

A decade ago, Henrich1 proposed group size as a driver of cultural complexity. Derex et al.2 now present experimental results they say support this ‘group size hypothesis’ by seemingly showing that larger groups perform better than smaller groups under imitation-based cultural evolution. Our reanalysis of their experimental data, however, shows that larger groups actually perform worse than smaller groups. Thus, contrary to their claim, their data are consistent with empirical evidence discounting the group size hypothesis for non-food producing societies3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10. There is a Reply to this Brief Communication Arising by Derex, M. et al. Nature 511, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature13412 (2014).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: For each group size, observed and expected number of groups drawing only the simple artefact on the last step of the experiment.

References

  1. Henrich, J. Demography and cultural evolution: how adaptive cultural processes can produce maladaptive losses: the Tasmanian case. Am. Antiq. 69, 197–214 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Derex, M., Beugin, M.-P., Godelle, B. & Raymond M Experimental evidence for the influence of group size on cultural complexity. Nature 503, 389–391 (2014)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Collard, M., Kemery, M. & Banks, S. Causes of toolkit variation among hunter-gatherers: a test of four competing hypotheses. Can. J. Archaeol. 29, 1–19 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Collard, M., Briggs, B., Ruttle, A. & O’Brien, M. J. Niche construction and the toolkit of hunter-gatherers and food producers. Biol. Theory 6, 251–259 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Collard, M., Buchanan, B., O’Brien, M. J. & Scholnick, J. Risk, mobility or population size? Drivers of technological richness among contact-period western North American hunter-gatherers. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 368, 20120412 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Collard, M., Buchanan, B. & O’Brien, M. J. Population size as an explanation for patterns in the Paleolithic archaeological record: more caution is needed. Curr. Anthropol. 54 (S8). S388–S396 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Read, D. Tasmanian knowledge and skill: maladaptive imitation or adequate technology? Am. Antiq. 71, 164–184 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Read, D. An interaction model for resource implement complexity based on risk and number of annual moves. Am. Antiq. 73, 599–625 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Read, D. The misuse of a mathematical model: the Tasmanian case (Reply to Henrich’s response). eScholarship Univ. California http://escholarship.org/uc/item/88k8g4rj (2009)

  10. Read, D. Population size does not predict artifact complexity: analysis of data from Tasmania, Arctic hunter-gatherers, and Oceania. eScholarship Univ. California http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/61n4303q (2012)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

D.R. and C.A. contributed equally to this Brief Communications Arising.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dwight Read.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Competing Financial Interests Declared none.

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Andersson, C., Read, D. Group size and cultural complexity. Nature 511, E1 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13411

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13411

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing