Denmark

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. &lt;br&gt;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. &lt;br&gt;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. &lt;br&gt;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.

Cultural Evolution Society 2022

Uniformity in Dress: A Worldwide Cross-Cultural Comparison

cross-cultural research; evolutionary anthropology; clothing; adornment; synchrony; resource stress; tightness/looseness

**Welcome to ACL-IJCNLP 2021!**

The great event is jointly organized by the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) and Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing (AFNLP). 

As in previous years, the program of the conference includes a poster session, tutorials, workshops and demonstrations in addition to the main conference.


We were able to keep the registration fees similar to those charged for the virtual ACL 2020. The one fee allows attendance at the main conference and any/all tutorials and workshops. These fees would be $125 Regular Early and $175 Regular Late; $50 Student Early and $75 Student Late. Early registration closes at midnight July 11, 2021 (Eastern Daylight Time).

**Reminder:** It is ACL’s policy that at least one author of each accepted paper (including ACL Finding papers) must register for the conference.

**Reminder2:** Underline site will open closer to the event. If you already registered you will receive access detail

Registration is now open

IJCNLP-AACL 2021

The great event is jointly organized by the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) and Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing (AFNLP).

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.

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.

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):** Perez, J; Derex, M; Kandler, A; Fogarty, L As individuals explore a space of potential solutions, they gather many different types of
information. One type of information can be knowledge about how to produce the most efficient
solution they have discovered so far. Another type of information could concern the features that
seem to predict better than average solutions, which can be used to guide the generation of new
solutions. The transmission of the latter, referred to as boundary-rules, is widespread in human
populations. Yet, empirical research in cultural evolution has mainly focused on the former,
assuming that culture accumulates as individuals modify previously discovered solutions. These
two types of social information are likely to have different consequences on how cultural variation
is introduced. We conducted an online experiment with 400 human participants to compare the
effect of transmitting rules versus solutions on the cultural variation introduced by social learners.
We found that social learners who received a rule were more prone to generate new variants than
those who received a solution, and that the variants they generated were less similar to one
another. Receiving a rule also led social learners to be less similar to their demonstrators
compared to receiving a solution. Finally, we found that rules are more often transmitted without
modifications than solutions, but that such modifications have a greater impact on inter-
generational variation. Despite these differences, both transmitting rules and solutions were found
to support cumulative improvement of the productions.

Does the nature of the information received by social learners influence their exploratory behavior ?

**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

**Author(s):** Matzig, DN; Warnock, R; Marwick, B; Riede, F The use of phylogenetic methods for the of study macroarchaeological processes of cultural evolution has long been advocated for, especially for the study of artefact shape. Due to technical limitations, the use of discrete character traits in these efforts prevails, which comes along with a non-trivial set of challenges. However, recent methodological advances in palaeobiology (Parins-Fukuchi 2017; Zhang, Drummond, and Mendes 2021) allow us now to infer Bayesian phylogenies using continuous characters. In this article, we present an exploratory analysis of cultural evolution in the European Final Palaeolithic and earliest Mesolithic (~15.000-11.000 BP) using a time-scaled Bayesian phylogeny based on the outline shape of lithic tools obtained from legacy data via 2D outline based geometric morphometrics. We estimate the rates of diversification and trait evolution in artefact shape, and test whether the recovered patterns correlate with the climatic and environmental changes within this timeframe. While common in cultural evolutionary analyses of language, the extension of Bayesian phylogenetic methods to archaeology represents a major methodological breakthrough.

An analysis of European Late Upper Palaeolithic stone tool evolution using a Bayesian phylogenetic framework

 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.

From Beethoven to Beyoncé: Do Changing Aesthetic Cultures Amount to Cumulative Cultural Evolution?

Introduction: The spatial composition of human portraits obeys historically changing cultural norms. It is also affected by cognitive factors that cause greater spontaneous attention to what is in front rather in the back of an agent. Scenes with more space in front of a directed object are both more often produced and judged as more aesthetically pleasant. This leads to the prediction that, in profile-oriented human portraits, compositions with more space in front of depicted agents (a “forward bias”) should be over-represented. Materials and Methods: We analyzed a large dataset (total N of 1,831 paintings by 582 unique identified European painters from the 15th to the 20th century) collected from WikiArt and for which we measured how the free space was distributed around the sitter. Results: In line with a forward bias, painters tended to put more free space in front of, rather than behind, the sitters. We also found evidence that this forward bias became stronger when cultural norms of spatial composition favoring centering became less stringent. Discussion: This study exemplifies both the importance of cognitive factors in shaping cultural productions and how they interact with explicit cultural norms. I will also discuss how this case study –and others- have implications for using large-scale datasets that have become recently available, other types of methods, and specific frameworks.

Premium content

Uniformity in Dress: A Worldwide Cross-Cultural Comparison

Downloads

Next from Cultural Evolution Society 2022

Religion and Reality

Similar lecture

Tackling Fake News Detection by Interactively Learning Representations using Graph Neural Networks

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES