TY - JOUR
T1 - The zone of latent solutions and its relevance to understanding ape cultures
AU - Tennie, Claudio
AU - Bandini, Elisa
AU - van Schaik, Carel P.
AU - Hopper, Lydia M.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors are grateful to Alba Motes-Rodrigo, Alberto Acerbi, Damien Neadle, Jordy Orellana, William Snyder, David Boysen and Harriet Over for helpful comments on earlier versions or parts of the manuscript. The authors are also grateful to Damien Neadle for creating the artwork and to Mimi Arandjelovic for helpful discussions. Note that we have back-checked our characterization of CE with one of the leading independent experts of CE—Andrew Buskell—but any remaining mischaracterisations of CE remain our own fault. This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No. 714658; STONECULT project). CT was supported in part by the ERC STONECULT grant at the time of writing. CT and EB are both supported by the Institutional Strategy of the University of Tübingen (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, ZUK 63).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, The Author(s).
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - The zone of latent solutions (ZLS) hypothesis provides an alternative approach to explaining cultural patterns in primates and many other animals. According to the ZLS hypothesis, non-human great ape (henceforth: ape) cultures consist largely or solely of latent solutions. The current competing (and predominant) hypothesis for ape culture argues instead that at least some of their behavioural or artefact forms are copied through specific social learning mechanisms (“copying social learning hypothesis”) and that their forms may depend on copying (copying-dependent forms). In contrast, the ape ZLS hypothesis does not require these forms to be copied. Instead, it suggests that several (non-form-copying) social learning mechanisms help determine the frequency (but typically not the form) 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 (cued) 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 (provided sufficient opportunity, necessity, motivation and timing). 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 (and/or artefact) 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.
AB - The zone of latent solutions (ZLS) hypothesis provides an alternative approach to explaining cultural patterns in primates and many other animals. According to the ZLS hypothesis, non-human great ape (henceforth: ape) cultures consist largely or solely of latent solutions. The current competing (and predominant) hypothesis for ape culture argues instead that at least some of their behavioural or artefact forms are copied through specific social learning mechanisms (“copying social learning hypothesis”) and that their forms may depend on copying (copying-dependent forms). In contrast, the ape ZLS hypothesis does not require these forms to be copied. Instead, it suggests that several (non-form-copying) social learning mechanisms help determine the frequency (but typically not the form) 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 (cued) 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 (provided sufficient opportunity, necessity, motivation and timing). 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 (and/or artefact) 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.
KW - Ape culture
KW - Chimpanzee
KW - Copying social learning
KW - Copying-dependent forms
KW - Imitation
KW - Individual learning
KW - Socially mediated reinnovations
KW - Zone of latent solutions
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85092295788&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85092295788&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10539-020-09769-9
DO - 10.1007/s10539-020-09769-9
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85092295788
SN - 0169-3867
VL - 35
JO - Biology and Philosophy
JF - Biology and Philosophy
IS - 5
M1 - 55
ER -