scholarly journals Changes in cognitive flexibility and hypothesis search across human life history from childhood to adolescence to adulthood

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (30) ◽  
pp. 7892-7899 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Gopnik ◽  
Shaun O’Grady ◽  
Christopher G. Lucas ◽  
Thomas L. Griffiths ◽  
Adrienne Wente ◽  
...  

How was the evolution of our unique biological life history related to distinctive human developments in cognition and culture? We suggest that the extended human childhood and adolescence allows a balance between exploration and exploitation, between wider and narrower hypothesis search, and between innovation and imitation in cultural learning. In particular, different developmental periods may be associated with different learning strategies. This relation between biology and culture was probably coevolutionary and bidirectional: life-history changes allowed changes in learning, which in turn both allowed and rewarded extended life histories. In two studies, we test how easily people learn an unusual physical or social causal relation from a pattern of evidence. We track the development of this ability from early childhood through adolescence and adulthood. In the physical domain, preschoolers, counterintuitively, perform better than school-aged children, who in turn perform better than adolescents and adults. As they grow older learners are less flexible: they are less likely to adopt an initially unfamiliar hypothesis that is consistent with new evidence. Instead, learners prefer a familiar hypothesis that is less consistent with the evidence. In the social domain, both preschoolers and adolescents are actually the most flexible learners, adopting an unusual hypothesis more easily than either 6-y-olds or adults. There may be important developmental transitions in flexibility at the entry into middle childhood and in adolescence, which differ across domains.

2006 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-289
Author(s):  
Peter Kappeler

The proposition that selective advantages of linguistic skills have contributed to shifts in ontogenetic landmarks of human life histories in early Homo sapiens is weakened by neglecting alternative mechanisms of life history evolution. Moreover, arguments about biological continuity through sweeping comparisons with nonhuman primates do not support various assumptions of this scenario.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Koster ◽  
Richard Mcelreath ◽  
Kim Hill ◽  
Douglas Yu ◽  
Glenn Shepard ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTHuman adaptation depends upon the integration of slow life history, complex production skills, and extensive sociality. Refining and testing models of the evolution of human life history and cultural learning will benefit from increasingly accurate measurement of knowledge, skills, and rates of production with age. We pursue this goal by inferring individual hunters’ of hunting skill gain and loss from approximately 23,000 hunting records generated by more than 1,800 individuals at 40 locations. The model provides an improved picture of ages of peak productivity as well as variation within and among ages. The data reveal an average age of peak productivity between 30 and 35 years of age, though high skill is maintained throughout much of adulthood. In addition, there is substantial variation both among individuals and sites. Within study sites, variation among individuals depends more upon heterogeneity in rates of decline than in rates of increase. This analysis sharpens questions about the co-evolution of human life history and cultural adaptation. It also demonstrates new statistical algorithms and models that expand the potential inferences drawn from detailed quantitative data collected in the field.


2020 ◽  
Vol 375 (1803) ◽  
pp. 20190492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik Deffner ◽  
Richard McElreath

Social learning and life history interact in human adaptation, but nearly all models of the evolution of social learning omit age structure and population regulation. Further progress is hindered by a poor appreciation of how life history affects selection on learning. We discuss why life history and age structure are important for social learning and present an exemplary model of the evolution of social learning in which demographic properties of the population arise endogenously from assumptions about per capita vital rates and different forms of population regulation. We find that, counterintuitively, a stronger reliance on social learning is favoured in organisms characterized by ‘fast’ life histories with high mortality and fertility rates compared to ‘slower’ life histories typical of primates. Long lifespans make early investment in learning more profitable and increase the probability that the environment switches within generations. Both effects favour more individual learning. Additionally, under fertility regulation (as opposed to mortality regulation), more juveniles are born shortly after switches in the environment when many adults are not adapted, creating selection for more individual learning. To explain the empirical association between social learning and long life spans and to appreciate the implications for human evolution, we need further modelling frameworks allowing strategic learning and cumulative culture. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Life history and learning: how childhood, caregiving and old age shape cognition and culture in humans and other animals’.


2020 ◽  
Vol 375 (1803) ◽  
pp. 20190489
Author(s):  
Alison Gopnik ◽  
Willem E. Frankenhuis ◽  
Michael Tomasello

This special issue focuses on the relationship between life history and learning, especially during human evolution. ‘Life history’ refers to the developmental programme of an organism, including its period of immaturity, reproductive rate and timing, caregiving investment and longevity. Across many species an extended childhood and high caregiving investment appear to be correlated with particular kinds of plasticity and learning. Human life history is particularly distinctive; humans evolved an exceptionally long childhood and old age, and an unusually high level of caregiving investment, at the same time that they evolved distinctive capacities for cognition and culture. The contributors explore the relations between life history, plasticity and learning across a wide range of methods and populations, including theoretical and empirical work in biology, anthropology and developmental psychology. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Life history and learning: how childhood, caregiving and old age shape cognition and culture in humans and other animals’.


2009 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark V. Flinn ◽  
Michael P. Muehlenbein ◽  
Davide Ponzi

AbstractAn extended period of childhood and juvenility is a distinctive aspect of human life history. This stage appears to be important for learning cultural, social, and ecological skills that help prepare the child for the adult socio-competitive environment. The unusual pattern of adrenarche in humans (and chimpanzees) may facilitate adaptive modification of the neurobiological mechanisms that underpin reproductive strategies. Longitudinal monitoring of DHEA/S in naturalistic context could provide important new insights into these aspects of child development.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (26) ◽  
pp. eaax9070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Koster ◽  
Richard McElreath ◽  
Kim Hill ◽  
Douglas Yu ◽  
Glenn Shepard ◽  
...  

Human adaptation depends on the integration of slow life history, complex production skills, and extensive sociality. Refining and testing models of the evolution of human life history and cultural learning benefit from increasingly accurate measurement of knowledge, skills, and rates of production with age. We pursue this goal by inferring hunters’ increases and declines of skill from approximately 23,000 hunting records generated by more than 1800 individuals at 40 locations. The data reveal an average age of peak productivity between 30 and 35 years of age, although high skill is maintained throughout much of adulthood. In addition, there is substantial variation both among individuals and sites. Within study sites, variation among individuals depends more on heterogeneity in rates of decline than in rates of increase. This analysis sharpens questions about the coevolution of human life history and cultural adaptation.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Sear

Interest in incorporating life history research from evolutionary biology into the human sciences has grown rapidly in recent years. Two core features of this research have the potential to prove valuable in strengthening theoretical frameworks in the health and social sciences: the idea that these is a fundamental trade-off between reproduction and health; and that environmental influences are important in determining individual life histories. For example, the idea that mortality risk in the environment shifts individuals along a ‘fast-slow continuum’ of ‘life history strategy’ is now popular in the evolutionary human sciences. In biology, ‘fast’ life history strategists prioritise reproduction over health so that individuals grow quickly, reproduce early and often, and suffer a rapid deterioration in health and relatively early death; ‘slow’ strategists start reproducing later, have fewer offspring, and die at an older age. Evolutionary human scientists tend to assume that, along with these life history outcomes, several behavioural traits, such as parenting, mating and risk-taking behaviour and, in the most expansive version, a whole suite of psychological and personality traits also cluster together into ‘fast’ and ‘slow’ life histories. Here, I review the different approaches to life history strategies from evolutionary anthropologists, developmental psychologists and evolutionary psychologists, in order to assess the theoretical and empirical evidence for human ‘life history strategies’. While there is precedent in biology for the argument that some behavioural traits, notably risk-taking behaviour, may be linked in predictable ways with life history outcomes, there is relatively little theoretical or empirical justification for including a very wide range of behavioural traits in a ‘life history strategy’. Given the diversity and lack of consistency in this human life history literature, I then make recommendations for improving its usefulness: 1) greater clarity over terminology, so that a distinction is made between life history outcomes such as age at maturity, first birth and death, and behavioural traits which may be associated with life history outcomes but are not life history traits themselves; 2) more empirical data on linkages between life history traits, behavioural traits and the environment, including the underlying mechanisms which generate these linkages; 3) more empirical work on life history strategies in a much broader range of populations than has so far been studied. Such a research programme on human life history has the potential to produce valuable insights for the health and social sciences, not least because of its interest in environmental influences on health, reproduction and behaviour.


2020 ◽  
Vol 375 (1803) ◽  
pp. 20190498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Richerson ◽  
Robert Boyd

Humans evolved from an ape ancestor that was highly intelligent, moderately social and moderately dependent on cultural adaptations for subsistence technology (tools). By the late Pleistocene, humans had become highly dependent on culture for subsistence and for rules to organize a complex social life. Adaptation by cultural traditions transformed our life history, leading to an extended juvenile period to learn subsistence and social skills, post-reproductive survival to help conserve and transmit skills, a dependence on social support for mothers of large-brained, very dependent and nutrient-demanding offspring, males devoting substantial effort to provisioning rather than mating, and the cultivation of large social networks to tap pools in information unavailable to less social species. One measure of the success of the exploitation of culture is that the minimum inter-birth interval of humans is nearly half that of our ape relatives. Another measure is the wide geographical distribution of humans compared with other apes, based on subsistence systems adapted to fine-scale spatial environmental variation. An important macro-evolutionary question is why our big-brained, culture-intensive life-history strategy evolved so recently and in only our lineage. We suggest that increasing spatial and temporal variation in the Pleistocene favoured cultural adaptations. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Life history and learning: how childhood, caregiving and old age shape cognition and culture in humans and other animals'.


2020 ◽  
Vol 375 (1803) ◽  
pp. 20190501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Hawkes

Postmenopausal longevity distinguishes humans from our closest living evolutionary cousins, the great apes, and may have evolved in our lineage when the economic productivity of grandmothers allowed mothers to wean earlier and overlap dependents. Since increased longevity retards development and expands brain size across the mammals, this hypothesis links our slower developing, bigger brains to ancestral grandmothering. If foraging interdependence favoured postmenopausal longevity because grandmothers' subsidies reduced weaning ages, then ancestral infants lost full maternal engagement while their slower developing brains were notably immature. With survival dependent on social relationships, sensitivity to reputations is wired very early in neural ontogeny, beginning our lifelong preoccupation with shared intentionality. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Life history and learning: how childhood, caregiving and old age shape cognition and culture in humans and other animals’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document