Population size does not explain past changes in cultural complexity

106Citations
Citations of this article
284Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Demography is increasingly being invoked to account for features of the archaeological record, such as the technological conservatism of the Lower and Middle Pleistocene, the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition, and cultural loss in Holocene Tasmania. Such explanations are commonly justified in relation to population dynamic models developed by Henrich [Henrich J (2004) Am Antiq 69:197-214] and Powell et al. [Powell A, et al. (2009) Science 324(5932):1298-1301], which appear to demonstrate that population size is the crucial determinant of cultural complexity. Here, we show that these models fail in two important respects. First, they only support a relationship between demography and culture in implausible conditions. Second, their predictions conflict with the available archaeological and ethnographic evidence. We conclude that new theoretical and empirical research is required to identify the factors that drove the changes in cultural complexity that are documented by the archaeological record.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vaesen, K., Collard, M., Cosgrove, R., & Roebroeks, W. (2016). Population size does not explain past changes in cultural complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(16), E4241–E4247. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1520288113

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free