IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0050863.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the Cultural Transmission of Irrelevant Tool Actions in Adult Humans (Homo Sapiens) Best Explained as the Result of an Evolved Conformist Bias?

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola McGuigan
  • Daryl Gladstone
  • Lisa Cook

Abstract

Background: Recent studies of social learning have revealed that adult humans are “over-imitators” who frequently reproduce a model's causally irrelevant tool actions to the detriment of task efficiency. At present our knowledge of adult over-imitation is limited to the fact that adults do over-imitate, we know very little about the causes of this behavior. The current study aimed to provide novel insights into adult over-imitation by extending a paradigm recently used with human children to explore social aspects of over-imitation. In the child study observers saw two models demonstrate a tool-use task using the same inefficient approach, or two models demonstrate different approaches to the task (one inefficient and one efficient). The manipulation of social influence came in the testing phase where the observer completed the task in the presence of either an inefficient model or an efficient model. Methodology/Principal Findings: We adapted the paradigm used in the child study to provide the first systematic exploration of factors which may lead to adult over-imitation including: 1) the presence of the model(s) during testing, 2) the presence of a competing efficient task demonstration, 3) the presence of a majority displaying the inefficient approach, and 4) the ‘removal’ of the experimental context during task completion. We show that the adult participants only over-imitated in conditions where the inefficient strategy was the majority approach witnessed. This tendency towards over-imitation was almost entirely eliminated when the participants interacted with the task when they believed the experiment to be complete. Conclusions: Our results suggest that adult over-imitation is best explained as a result of an evolved ‘conformist bias’ argued to be crucial to the transmission of human cultural behavior and one which may be unique in the animal kingdom.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola McGuigan & Daryl Gladstone & Lisa Cook, 2012. "Is the Cultural Transmission of Irrelevant Tool Actions in Adult Humans (Homo Sapiens) Best Explained as the Result of an Evolved Conformist Bias?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0050863
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0050863
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0050863&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0050863?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Cialdini, 2007. "Descriptive Social Norms as Underappreciated Sources of Social Control," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 263-268, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Semjén, András, 2017. "Az adózói magatartás különféle magyarázatai [Various explanations for tax compliance]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 140-184.
    2. Aydin Kayabasi & Ceren Karavelioglu & N. Derya Ergun Ozler, 2021. "The Effect of Institutional Environment, General SelfEfficacy and Desirability On Social Entrepreneurship Intentions in Turkey," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 50(2), pages 411-434, November.
    3. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Faure, Corinne & Meissner, Thomas, 2016. "Making the implicit explicit: A look inside the implicit discount rate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 321-331.
    4. Matilde Giaccherini & David H. Herberich & David Jimenez-Gomez & John A. List & Giovanni Ponti & Michael K. Price, 2019. "The Behavioralist Goes Door-To-Door: Understanding Household Technological Diffusion Using a Theory-Driven Natural Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 26173, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia & Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2019. "How do motives and knowledge relate to intention to perform environmental behavior? Assessing the mediating role of constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Andrew Dustan & Stanislao Maldonado & Juan Manuel Hernandez-Agramonte, 2018. "Motivating bureaucrats with non-monetary incentives when state capacity is weak: Evidence from large-scale field experiments in Peru," Working Papers 136, Peruvian Economic Association.
    7. Miklós Antal & Ardjan Gazheli & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2012. "Behavioural Foundations of Sustainability Transitions. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 3," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 46424.
    8. Folke Ölander & John Thøgersen, 2014. "Informing Versus Nudging in Environmental Policy," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 341-356, September.
    9. Olsthoorn, Mark & Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne, 2019. "Exploring the diffusion of low-energy houses: An empirical study in the European Union," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1382-1393.
    10. van der Weele Joël, 2012. "Beyond the State of Nature: Introducing Social Interactions in the Economic Model of Crime," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 401-432, October.
    11. Itzhak Rasooly & Roberto Rozzi, 2022. "Masks, Cameras, and Social Pressure," Working Papers hal-03892947, HAL.
    12. Robert Neumann, 2019. "The framing of charitable giving: A field experiment at bottle refund machines in Germany," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(1), pages 98-126, February.
    13. Ellen van der Werff & Chieh-Yu Lee, 2021. "Feedback to Minimize Household Waste a Field Experiment in The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-21, August.
    14. Meek, William R. & Pacheco, Desirée F. & York, Jeffrey G., 2010. "The impact of social norms on entrepreneurial action: Evidence from the environmental entrepreneurship context," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 493-509, September.
    15. Gerrans, Paul & Moulang, Carly & Feng, Jun & Strydom, Maria, 2018. "Individual and peer effects in retirement savings investment choices," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 150-165.
    16. Benjamin Van Rooij & Adam Fine, 2018. "Toxic Corporate Culture: Assessing Organizational Processes of Deviancy," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-38, June.
    17. Reynaud, Arnaud & Ouvrard, Benjamin, 2024. "Re-calibrating beliefs about peers: Direct impacts and cross-learning effects in agriculture," TSE Working Papers 24-1517, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    18. Bela Florenthal & Manar Awad, 2021. "A cross-cultural comparison of millennials’ engagement with and donation to nonprofits: a hybrid U&G and TAM framework," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 18(4), pages 629-657, December.
    19. Idahosa, Love Odion & Akotey, Joseph Oscar, 2021. "A social constructionist approach to managing HVAC energy consumption using social norms – A randomised field experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    20. Philippe Le Coent & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2016. "Do social norms influence farmers’ participation in agri-environmental schemes?," Post-Print hal-02743066, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0050863. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.