Imitation as an inheritance system

Abstract

What is the evolutionary significance of the various mechanisms of imitation, emulation and social learning found in humans and other animals? This paper presents an advance in the theoretical resources for addressing that question, in the light of which standard approaches from the cultural evolution literature should be refocused. The central question is whether humans have an imitationbased inheritance system-a mechanism that has the evolutionary function of transmitting behavioural phenotypes reliably down the generations. To have the evolutionary power of an inheritance system, an imitiation-based mechanism must meet a range of demanding requirements. The paper goes on to review the evidence for and against the hypothesis that there is indeed an imitation-based inheritance system in humans.

Blackboxing: social learning strategies and cultural evolution

“…As in gene-based evolution, each new instance or 'token' of a cultural type must be a copy of one or a small number of existing tokens. It is not sufficient for the earlier-occurring and later-occurring tokens merely to be alike, or for the latter to be loosely inspired by the former [20,50,51]. My bread-making skill is the offspring of your bread-making skill to the extent that I acquired my skill by copying your technique, and resisted blending your technique with others I observed, or with my own bright ideas about bread making.…”

The impact of imitative versus emulative learning mechanisms on artifactual variation: implications for the evolution of material culture

“…Conversely, emulation is often assumed not to be capable 532 of transmitting cultural modifications at the level of copying fidelity required to maintain 533 ‗artifactual traditions' over the long-term, because only the end-state is copied rather than the 534 exact behavioral patterns involved (Tomasello, 1999;Whiten et al 2009b). For this reason, 535 emulation has been hypothesized potentially incapable of sufficiently impeding rates of 536 ‗cultural mutations' to explain the long-term preservation of lasting artifactual ‗traditions' in 537 the archaeological record (Shea, 2009). 538…”

“…Thus, differences in the 517 shape error rates between the two conditions could be confidently traced to the differences in 518 the learning context. and end-state product that imitation is argued to contain the capacity to considerably reduce 530 variation-generating rates of cultural mutation which threaten to erode emerging patterns of 531 artifactual traditions (Shea, 2009). Conversely, emulation is often assumed not to be capable 532 of transmitting cultural modifications at the level of copying fidelity required to maintain 533 ‗artifactual traditions' over the long-term, because only the end-state is copied rather than the 534 exact behavioral patterns involved (Tomasello, 1999;Whiten et al 2009b).…”

Factors affecting Acheulean handaxe variation: Experimental insights, microevolutionary processes, and macroevolutionary outcomes

“…noted that further research was necessary to support this proposition. One pertinent factor here, is that despite the widespread assumption that imitation is a relatively "high fidelity" means of social learning compared even to emulation (e.g., Byrne and Russon, 1998;Tomasello, 1999;Heyes, 2009;Shea, 2009;Whiten et al, 2009) the outcomes of various means of social learning on patterns of artifactual variation are not well studied empirically.…”

“…Conversely, imitation (Thorndike, 1898) is classed as a distinctive mode of social learning because it also involves the learner directly copying the detailed techniques and behavioral actions of another individual in order to bring about the same "result" (see e.g., Whiten et al, 2004). Given these contrasts, there have been suggestions that imitation will lead to greater fidelity in behavioral outcomes because of its greater capacity for the more "complete" and "accurate" learning of both the manufacturing actions and the actual physical properties of the artifact itself (e.g., Byrne and Russon, 1998;Tomasello, 1999;Heyes, 2009;Shea, 2009;Whiten et al, 2009). Accordingly, emulation has been considered to be relatively poor at maintaining copying fidelity in traditions, and as such, would not (theoretically) have the same capacity to sustain behavioral patterns over the course of time as imitation (Galef, 1992;Tomasello et al, 1993;Tomasello 1999).…”