The zone of latent solutions and its relevance to understanding ape cultures.Claudio Tennie,Elisa Bandini,Carel P. van Schaik &Lydia M. Hopper -2020 -Biology and Philosophy 35 (5):1-42.detailsThe zone of latent solutions hypothesis provides an alternative approach to explaining cultural patterns in primates and many other animals. According to the ZLS hypothesis, non-human great ape cultures consist largely or solely of latent solutions. The current competing hypothesis for ape culture argues instead that at least some of their behavioural or artefact forms are copied through specific social learning mechanisms and that their forms may depend on copying. In contrast, the ape ZLS hypothesis does not require these forms (...) to be copied. Instead, it suggests that several social learning mechanisms help determine the frequency of these behaviours and artefacts within connected individuals. The ZLS hypothesis thus suggests that increases and stabilisations of a particular behaviour’s or artefact’s frequency can derive from socially-mediated form reinnovations. Therefore, and while genes and ecology play important roles as well, according to the ape ZLS hypothesis, apes typically acquire the forms of their behaviours and artefacts individually, but are usually socially induced to do so. The ZLS approach is often criticized—perhaps also because it challenges the current null hypothesis, which instead assumes a requirement of form-copying social learning mechanisms to explain many ape behavioural forms. However, as the ZLS hypothesis is a new approach, with less accumulated literature compared to the current null hypothesis, some confusion is to be expected. Here, we clarify the ZLS approach—also in relation to other competing hypotheses—and address misconceptions and objections. We believe that these clarifications will provide researchers with a coherent theoretical approach and an experimental methodology to examine the necessity of form-copying variants of social learning in apes, humans and other species. (shrink)
Mere Recurrence and Cumulative Culture at the Margins.Andrew Buskell &Claudio Tennie -2025 -British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 76 (1):123-145.detailsThe consensus formulation of cumulative culture characterizes cumulative traditions as information transmitted by high-fidelity learning that generates incremental improvement over time. While this formulation is effective for studying paradigmatic cases (for example, Holocene-era hominin toolkits), it is less so at capturing and explaining putative cases at the margins—for instance, some recurrent behaviours observed in social animal species. This article argues against the consensus formulation in favour of a minimal one, which links cumulative culture to what we call ‘copying know-how’ and (...) the transmission of trait form. As we argue, these elements are better able to characterize putative instances of marginal cumulative culture. Yet by rejecting incremental improvement, the minimal formulation raises a tricky empirical problem we call ‘mere recurrence’: distinguishing cumulative culture from other processes that sustain recurrent behaviour. We highlight three broad types of processes that generate mere recurrence, distinguishing them from copying know-how. Finally, we put the assembled conceptual tools to use in a case study, distinguishing the accounts of cultural epidemiologists from those working on the zone of latent solutions—arguing against those that have tried to align the two. (shrink)
The Zone of Latent Solutions and Its Relation to the Classics: Vygotsky and Köhler.Eva Reindl,Elisa Bandini &Claudio Tennie -2018 - In Laura Desirèe Di Paolo, Fabio Di Vincenzo & Francesca De Petrillo,Evolution of Primate Social Cognition. Springer Verlag. pp. 231-248.detailsIn 2009, Tennie et al. proposed the theory of the Zone of Latent Solutions, defined as the range of behaviors an individual of a species can invent independently, i.e., which it can acquire without any form of social learning. By definition, species limited to their ZLS are unable to innovate and/or transmit behavioral traits outside their ZLS, i.e., they lack traits which go beyond the level of the individual—traits resulting from a gradual cultural evolution over successive transmission events [“cumulative culture”, (...) Boyd and Richerson ]. However, this does not exclude an influence of social learning on the population frequency of these behaviors: social learning can facilitate the acquisition of latent solutions and thus speed up and consolidate their spread within a population. Cultures—defined as behaviors at least influenced by social learning—are therefore still possible. Here, we elaborate on the ZLS account and relate it to the theories of Vygotsky who studied the role of social learning in human culture. We argue that the ZLS is a missing phylogenetic “baseline” of Vygotsky’s Zone of Actual Development. Vygotsky’s neglect of a need for a human “baseline ZAD” may have been due to his interpretation of Köhler’s work on great ape behaviors: Köhler used his observations on individual chimpanzees to draw conclusions about the chimpanzee species as a whole, stating that chimpanzees can only copy what they could have invented themselves, thus coming close to the ZLS concept. Vygotsky—studying the range of behaviors individuals could achieve independently—seemingly did not see that Köhler was suggesting a species “baseline”, upon which Vygotsky’s idea of an individual’s ZAD could develop. As a result, Vygotsky also did not see the need for a ZLS for his own study subjects: humans. Yet, there is no reason to assume that humans lack a ZLS, and in fact we present evidence for a human ZLS for tool-use behaviors. (shrink)
No categories
Clarifying Misconceptions of the Zone of Latent Solutions Hypothesis: A Response to Haidle and Schlaudt: Miriam Noël Haidle and Oliver Schlaudt: Where Does Cumulative Culture Begin? A Plea for a Sociologically Informed Perspective.Elisa Bandini,Jonathan Scott Reeves,William Daniel Snyder &Claudio Tennie -2021 -Biological Theory 16 (2):76-82.detailsThe critical examination of current hypotheses is one of the key ways in which scientific fields develop and grow. Therefore, any critique, including Haidle and Schlaudt’s article, “Where Does Cumulative Culture Begin? A Plea for a Sociologically Informed Perspective,” represents a welcome addition to the literature. However, critiques must also be evaluated. In their article, Haidle and Schlaudt review some approaches to culture and cumulative culture in both human and nonhuman primates. H&S discuss the “zone of latent solutions” hypothesis as (...) applied to nonhuman primates and stone-toolmaking premodern hominins. Here, we will evaluate whether H&S’s critique addresses its target. (shrink)
Could nonhuman great apes also have cultural evolutionary psychology?Claudio Tennie -2019 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 42.detailsAttempted answers are given to whether nonhuman great apes also have evolved imitation ; whether humans can transmit imitation as a gadget to apes ; whether human-to-ape transmission can kickstart subsequent and stable ape cultural evolutionary psychology ; and when CEP evolved in our lineage.
No categories
Cultural intelligence is key to explaining human tool use.Claudio Tennie &Harriet Over -2012 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (4):242-243.detailsContrary to Vaesen, we argue that a small number of key traits are sufficient to explain modern human tool use. Here we outline and defend the cultural intelligence (CI) hypothesis. In doing so, we critically re-examine the role of social transmission in explaining human tool use.
All that glitters is not gold: The false-symbol problem in archaeology.Claudio Tennie &Ronald J. Planer -2025 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 48:e18.detailsStibbard-Hawkes forcefully alerts us to the pitfall of false-negative reasoning in symbolic archaeology. We highlight the twin problem of false-positive reasoning in what we call the “false-symbol problem.” False symbols are intuitively special entities that, owing to their non-utilitarian nature, invite symbolic interpretation. But they are not symbolic. We link the false-symbol problem to work in comparative primate cognition, taking “primate art” as our main example.
Cognitive mechanisms matter - but they do not explain the absence of teaching in chimpanzees.Richard Moore &Claudio Tennie -2015 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 38:e50.detailsKline's functional categories for the evolution of teaching blur some valuable distinctions. Moreover, her account provides no answer to the question of why direct active teaching seems to be a uniquely human phenomenon.
Correlates of Vocal Tract Evolution in Late Pliocene and Pleistocene Hominins.Axel G. Ekström,Peter Gärdenfors,William D. Snyder,Daniel Friedrichs,Robert C. McCarthy,Melina Tsapos,Claudio Tennie,David S. Strait,Jens Edlund &Steven Moran -forthcoming -Human Nature:1-48.detailsDespite decades of research on the emergence of human speech capacities, an integrative account consistent with hominin evolution remains lacking. We review paleoanthropological and archaeological findings in search of a timeline for the emergence of modern human articulatory morphological features. Our synthesis shows that several behavioral innovations coincide with morphological changes to the would-be speech articulators. We find that significant reductions of the mandible and masticatory muscles and vocal tract anatomy coincide in the hominin fossil record with the incorporation of (...) processed and (ultimately) cooked food, the appearance and development of rudimentary stone tools, increases in brain size, and likely changes to social life and organization. Many changes are likely mutually reinforcing; for example, gracilization of the hominin mandible may have been maintainable in the lineage because food processing had already been outsourced to the hands and stone tools, reducing selection pressures for robust mandibles in the process. We highlight correlates of the evolution of craniofacial and vocal tract features in the hominin lineage and outline a timeline by which our ancestors became ‘pre-adapted’ for the evolution of fully modern human speech. (shrink)
No categories
Punishing for your own good: the case of reputation-based cooperation.Claudio Tennie -2012 -Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (1):40-41.detailsContrary to Guala, I claim that several mechanisms can explain punishment in humans. Here I focus on reputation-based cooperation – and I explore how it can lead to punishment under situations that may or may not be perceived as being anonymous. Additionally, no particular mechanism stands out in predicting an excess of punishment under constrained lab conditions.