Denmark

**Author(s):** Defelipe, R. P.; Mendes, D.; França, I. F.; &amp; Resende, B. Our goal was to provide a how-to guide to move infant observational research from lab to home. We searched four databases (Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, Frontiers in Psychology Special Issue) from January to February 2022, using ‘infant/children’, ‘online/web-based/tele-observation’, ‘pandemic/Covid-19’ as descriptors. Eligible papers were in English or Portuguese, investigated children up to 13 years, used remote technology, and applied observation as methodology. Most of the 60 papers were from Developmental Psychology, from North America (e.g. USA), investigated Caucasian infants up to one year, used supervised online platforms (e.g. Zoom), used computers instead mobiles or tablets, and put the child facing the screen or in face-to-face interaction with the parents. The studies mostly concluded that remote infant observational research is feasible, especially, if you: observe infants up to one year old; design a short (e.g. 5 minute-session) and simple (e.g. free-play) experimental tasks; has already met your participants in person; give financial feedback (e.g. Amazon gifts); and are not dealing with low-income population with unsuitable internet and/or technological devices. The extent to which in-person research can be adapted for remote settings needs future investigation to promotes targeted investment in innovation, design, implementation, and effectiveness.

Cultural Evolution Society 2022

Moving infant observational research from lab to home: partial results from a systematic review

developmental psychology; online infant observation; systematic review

### Conference Welcome

Welcome to the third Cultural Evolution Society Conference, CES2021. In the conference, which will be held from June 9-11, 2021, about 180 researchers from East Asia, Oceania, Middle East, Europe, North and South America give presentations on their latest research advancing the evolutionary understanding of human and nonhuman animal culture.

### Schedule and Program

[![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/1ef06ffd05f80957b4a5b685f63ee3ba.png)](https://www.chain.hokudai.ac.jp/CES2020/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/fullprogram.pdf)
[![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/12285eb22580949635121d15d5b46325.png)](https://www.chain.hokudai.ac.jp/CES2020/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/abstracts.pdf)

**Program-at-glance**

![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/c0d0d4c8fcdad49d12631574fd966ae8.png)

### About the conference 
 
**Help-desk:** 
Please first visit [Help-desk](https://underline.io/events/120/help-desk) where you can find the instructions and manuals for exploring the conference site. 

**Plenary sessions:**
Five leading researchers give a live talk. It is like a TV show. The audience can submit a question from the chat window. Chat messages are immediately delivered to speakers and moderators.

**Q&A sessions (parallel):**
Each presenter first gives a 2-minute live lightning talk followed by an 8-minute live discussion with the audience. It uses Zoom.

**Discussion sessions:** 
The audience can approach presenters and discuss their research. The sessions are held in a dedicated room in Gathertown.
 
**Gathertown:**
It is a platform dedicated to live virtual interactions.
Gather Town is available for all participants 24 hours during the conference.
You can meet and talk with anybody at a lounge or at a table in Gathertown.
Further Gather Town instruction and how to use short keys please find in our [Help desk page](https://underline.io/events/120/help-desk). 

**Videos and slides:**

* Plenary sessions and the Q&A sessions will be recorded and uploaded after the sessions.
* All the videos and slides are available for 60 days after the conference but only to registered ones. 

**Text-based chatting with the speakers:** 
You can chat with any speaker in the Q&A and discussion sessions. A chat window is available on each speaker’s page, and you can leave your questions there. 

**Announcement to the other participants:**
If you want to make an announcement to the other participants (e.g., “Hey, let’s meet at the lounge in Gathertown from 9pm CEST!), please use twitter (#CESConf2021).



### Code of conduct

See the full details of [the code of conduct](https://www.chain.hokudai.ac.jp/CES2020/code-of-conduct/).
&nbsp; 
 CES is dedicated to providing a welcoming and harassment-free conference experience for everyone, regardless of gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, age, religion, nationality, or the presence of or care for dependents. 
We do not tolerate harassment of conference participants in any form. Conference participants violating these rules may be sanctioned or expelled from the conference at the discretion of the conference organizers.

&nbsp;
**Harassment can occur in-person or virtually, and includes, but is not limited to:**
* Comments (verbal, text, etc.) that reinforce social structures of domination related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, age, religion, nationality
* Sexual images in public spaces (physical or virtual)
* Deliberate intimidation, stalking, or following
* Harassing photography or recording (including sharing of presentation materials without consent)
* Sustained disruption of talks or other events (including “Zoombombing”)
* Inappropriate physical contact or unwelcome sexual attention
* Advocating for, or encouraging, any of the above behaviour 

&nbsp;
 **Inclusiveness Committee**:
&nbsp;
 To facilitate implementing the code of conduct and foster a climate of inclusion, we have developed an inclusiveness committee. Below is their contact information:
 **Hiromi Matsumae**:	matsumae.hiromi.g@tokai.ac.jp
 **Patrick Savage**:	psavage@sfc.keio.ac.jp
 **Sarah Mathew**:	Sarah.Mathew@asu.edu
 **Gmail:** inclusivenessCES2021@gmail.com
 See [more details about reporting the harassment.](https://www.chain.hokudai.ac.jp/CES2020/code-of-conduct/)

### Organizing committee

**Honorary Conference Organizer:** [Kenichi Aoki (Meiji University)](https://sites.google.com/site/kenichi1aoki/home) 

**Chair:** [Masanori Takezawa (Hokkaido University)](https://lalalarakko.github.io)

**Scientific Committee:** [Kenichi Aoki (Meiji University)](https://sites.google.com/site/kenichi1aoki/home), [Yasuo Ihara (the University of Tokyo)](https://researchmap.jp/read0209180?lang=en), [Hiromi Matsumae (Tokai University)](https://sites.google.com/site/hiromimatsumae/eng), [Naoko Matsumoto (Okayama University)](https://researchmap.jp/nmatsumoto_okayama-u), [Masako Myowa (Kyoto University)](https://myowa.educ.kyoto-u.ac.jp/en), [Hisashi Nakao (Nanzan University)](https://www.hisashinakao.com/), [Patrick E. Savage (Keio University)](https://sites.google.com/view/comp-music-lab/home)

**Local Organizing Committee:** [Yutaka Horita (Teikyo University)](https://sites.google.com/site/yhoritapage/), [Masanori Takezawa (Hokkaido University)](https://lalalarakko.github.io/), [Ayaka Takimoto (Hokkaido University)](https://lynx.let.hokudai.ac.jp/~takimoto/), [Kohei Tamura (Tohoku University)](https://researchmap.jp/7000017854)

**Inclusiveness Committee:** [Sarah Mathew (Arizona State University)](https://www.sarahmathew.net/), [Hiromi Matsumae (Tokai University)](https://sites.google.com/site/hiromimatsumae/eng), [Patrick E. Savage (Keio University)](https://sites.google.com/view/comp-music-lab/home)


![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/967110a00d200a6b20d6f4fa6556ba13.png)

For attending the conference, you first need to register and pay fees from [the link here](https://www.chain.hokudai.ac.jp/CES2020/registration/). After the payment of the registration fees, you will receive a ticket, which is necessary for accessing the conference site. After the payment of the registration fees, you will receive a ticket, which is necessary for accessing the conference site

Registration fee

Cultural Evolution Society 2021

**Author(s):** Defelipe, R. P.; Mendes, D.; França, I. F.; & Resende, B. Our goal was to provide a how-to guide to move infant observational research from lab to home. We searched four databases (Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, Frontiers in Psychology Special Issue) from January to February 2022, using ‘infant/children’, ‘online/web-based/tele-observation’, ‘pandemic/Covid-19’ as descriptors. Eligible papers were in English or Portuguese, investigated children up to 13 years, used remote technology, and applied observation as methodology. Most of the 60 papers were from Developmental Psychology, from North America (e.g. USA), investigated Caucasian infants up to one year, used supervised online platforms (e.g. Zoom), used computers instead mobiles or tablets, and put the child facing the screen or in face-to-face interaction with the parents. The studies mostly concluded that remote infant observational research is feasible, especially, if you: observe infants up to one year old; design a short (e.g. 5 minute-session) and simple (e.g. free-play) experimental tasks; has already met your participants in person; give financial feedback (e.g. Amazon gifts); and are not dealing with low-income population with unsuitable internet and/or technological devices. The extent to which in-person research can be adapted for remote settings needs future investigation to promotes targeted investment in innovation, design, implementation, and effectiveness.

technical paper

### Welcome to the fourth Cultural Evolution Society Conference, CES2022! 

As last year, Underline will support the online component of the conference. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is causing a great deal of uncertainty for all of us. Therefore, we seek to offer a hybrid format that will hopefully allow some folks to travel to Aarhus, others to meet up locally or regionally in CES hub-lets, and other yet to participate online. The field of cultural evolution is growing in size and scope; its theories, methods and applications - both academic and applied - are getting ever more robust. Do join us in what promises to be an exciting exchange of ideas and a celebration of our field.

##### ***For SoMe interaction and live tweeting please tag @CulturalEvolSoc and use #CESconf2022***


#### The CES 2022 local organising committee
* Luseadra Joy McKerracher
* Jesper Sørensen 
* Niels Nørkjær Johannsen 
* Benjamin Grant Purzycki 
* Mette Løvschal 
* Felix Riede
* Iza Romanowska 
* Karsten Olsen

Please click on the button bellow if you want to watch the videos

The field of cultural evolution is growing in size and scope; its theories, methods and applications - both academic and applied - are getting ever more robust. Do join us in what promises to be an exciting exchange of ideas and a celebration of our field.

**Author(s):** Pérez Velilla, Alejandro; Smaldino, Paul; Fedorova, Natalia Introduction: Risk-mitigation can be an important driver for the development of cultural practices and institutions. We concentrate on modeling the cultural evolutionary dynamics of sharing norms within clusters of individuals engaging in productive activities with associated risks, while sharing with each other at a cost. Through a process of growth and fission, sharing norms and sharer clusters evolve, leading to several possible configurations. Methods: Evolutionary game theory and insights from ergodicity economics are used to obtain results in a mathematical framework. Agent-based simulations are employed to generate simulated datasets with the future aim of interfacing with empirical data using Generative Inference. Results: Productivity increases the network carrying capacity of clusters as well as the optimal sharing norm, leading to more sharing in larger-sized clusters. Clusters can be at their densest in the regions of high variability, but sharing breaks down in both high-risk and high-security environments.

The evolution of sharing norms as cultural strategies for risk management

**Author(s):** Snyder, K; Sellers, M; Creanza, N Introduction 
Environmental stress, especially during development, can cause impaired learning in individuals. Thus, learned behaviors, such as birdsong, may exhibit unique evolutionary dynamics after severe weather events relative to other traits. We predict that ecosystem-level stressors may cause population-level changes to birdsong as cohorts experience early-life stress, learn songs imperfectly, and tutor future generations. 
Approach
In 2016, an unprecedented drought affected western New York. We analyzed publicly available and our own birdsong recordings from 2010-2020, comparing two species in the drought-affected area and a nearby unaffected area. We also developed an agent-based model of song evolution after environmental stress. 
Results and Conclusions
We found drought-associated song changes in the species with more complex songs but not in the species with a simple song, implying that stress-induced deficits may disproportionately affect traits that are more difficult to learn. With our model, we found important factors for enduring cultural evolution after stress: population isolation and stressor duration. Together, these results demonstrate that climatic events can induce population-level trait evolution due to disruption in learning.

Cultural evolution after environmental stress: a case study of songbird populations affected by the 2016 New York drought

Introduction: Focusing on clothing and adornment (dress), this worldwide cross-cultural comparison asks why people in some societies appear to dress in uniform or standardized ways, whereas in other societies individuals display considerable variability in dress. Materials/Methods: Hypotheses are tested on 80 societies drawn from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS). The central hypotheses consider the impact of general societal tightness or looseness, degree of egalitarianism, societal complexity, and resource stress. Exploratory methods identify four latent constructs of dress from newly coded variables, one latent construct for tightness/looseness, and one latent construct for resource stress. Results: As expected, increased societal tightness was positively related to increased standardization and rules regarding dress and increased resource stress is generally related to more standardization of dress and rules regarding adornment. Societies mid-range in complexity have more standardization. Contrary to expectations, the predictors of tightness-looseness differ from the predictors of dress. Discussion/Conclusion: While some of the theorized relationships are supported, at the end of paper we discuss some puzzling findings, speculate about possible explanations, and suggest further lines of research.

Uniformity in Dress: A Worldwide Cross-Cultural Comparison

Religion and Reality

Learning and Human Development

Social Categories and Relationships

**Author(s):** Borg, JM; Buskell, A; Kapitany, R; Powers, ST; Reindl, E; Tennie, C The goal of Artificial Life, as articulated by Chris Langton, is “to contribute to theoretical biology by locating life-as-we-know-it within the larger picture of life-as-it-could-be.” The study and pursuit of open-ended evolution in artificial evolutionary systems exemplifies this goal. However, open-ended evolution research is hampered by two fundamental issues; the struggle to replicate open-endedness in an artificial evolutionary system, and the fact that we only have one system (genetic evolution) from which to draw inspiration. Here we argue that cultural evolution should be seen not only as another real-world example of open-ended evolution, but that the unique qualities seen in cultural evolution provide us with a new perspective from which we can assess the fundamental properties of open-ended evolution. Here we highlight the interesting case of human cultural evolution as an open-ended evolutionary system and contextualise cultural evolution under the framework of evolved open-ended evolution. We go on to provide a set of new questions that can be asked once we consider cultural evolution within the framework of open-ended evolution, and introduce new insights that we may be able to gain about evolved open-endedness as a result of asking these questions.

Evolved Open-Endedness in Cultural Evolution: A New Dimension in Open-Ended Evolution Research

 Cumulative cultural evolution (CCE)—defined as the process by which beneficial modifications are culturally transmitted and progressively accumulated over time—has long been argued to underlie the unparalleled diversity and complexity of human culture. In this talk, I will argue that not just any kind of cultural

Open-ended cumulative culture depends on the gradual exploitation of natural phenomena

**Author(s):** Tennie, C; Reeves, J S; Snyder, W D The earliest claims for copying-dependent know-how in the human lineage are linked to stone tool production (knapping) techniques. These conclusions would be invalidated if knapping-technique-naive humans could learn how to knap in baselines – i.e. absent cultural access to the underlying know-how. Previous human knapping studies have tested subjects after various types of such cultural access were provided to them (e.g. verbal instructions). However, no level of knapping found in these studies can prove that the provided types of cultural access were necessary. The cultural access provided in these studies may have merely sped up (or replaced) individual learning. This leaves open the possibility that knapping-technique-naive humans would innovate knapping techniques on their own, if given a sufficiently long baseline. We tested human participants (N = 28) for individual learning of early knapping techniques in a long (4h) baseline. Post-test questionnaires showed that subjects had been knapping-technique-naive at test. Despite an absence of cultural access to their know-how, the vast majority of subjects individually innovated knapping techniques (in press; Sci Adv). This data attests the unsuitability of early knapping techniques as “smoking gun evidence” for copying-dependent know-how in the archaeological record.

Early knapping techniques do not require know-how copying

 Culture can be defined as “group typical behaviour patterns shared by members of a community that rely on socially learned and transmitted information” (Laland and Hoppitt, 2003, p. 151). Once thought to be a distinguishing characteristic of humans relative to other animals (Dean et al., 2014) it is now generally accepted to exist more widely, with especially abundant evidence in non-human primates, cetaceans, and birds (Rendell and Whitehead, 2001; Aplin, 2019; Whiten, 2021). More recently, cumulative cultural evolution (CCE) has taken on this distinguishing role (Henrich, 2015; Laland, 2018). CCE, it is argued, allows humans, uniquely, to ratchet up the complexity or efficiency of cultural traits over time. This “ratchet effect” (Tomasello, 1994) gives the capacity to accumulate beneficial modifications over time beyond the capacities of a single individual (Sasaki and Biro, 2017). Mesoudi and Thornton (2018) define a core set of criteria for identifying CCE in humans and non-human animals that places emphasis on some performance measure of traits increasing over time. They suggest this emphasis is also pertinent to cultural products in the aesthetic domain, but is this the case? Music, art and dance evolve over time (Savage, 2019), but can we say they gain beneficial modifications that increase their aesthetic value? Here we bring together perspectives from philosophy, musicology and biology to build a conceptual analysis of this question. We summarise current thinking on cumulative culture and aesthetics across fields to determine how aesthetic culture fits into the concept of CCE. We argue that this concept is problematic to reconcile with dominant views of aesthetics in philosophical analysis and struggles to characterise aesthetic cultures that evolve over time. We suggest that a tension arises from fundamental differences between cultural evolution in aesthetic and technological domains. Furthermore, this tension contributes to current debates between reconstructive and preservative theories of cultural evolution.

Premium content

Moving infant observational research from lab to home: partial results from a systematic review

Downloads

Next from Cultural Evolution Society 2022

The evolution of sharing norms as cultural strategies for risk management

Similar lecture

Children of mixed-faith parents are less religious

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES