518 research outputs found

    Big data and humanitarian supply networks: Can Big Data give voice to the voiceless?

    Get PDF
    This is the author's accepted manuscript. The final published article is available from the link below. Copyright © 2013 IEEE.Billions of US dollars are spent each year in emergency aid to save lives and alleviate the suffering of those affected by disaster. This aid flows through a humanitarian system that consists of governments, different United Nations agencies, the Red Cross movement and myriad non-governmental organizations (NGOs). As scarcer resources, financial crisis and economic inter-dependencies continue to constrain humanitarian relief there is an increasing focus from donors and governments to assess the impact of humanitarian supply networks. Using commercial (`for-profit') supply networks as a benchmark; this paper exposes the counter-intuitive competition dynamic of humanitarian supply networks, which results in an open-loop system unable to calibrate supply with actual need and impact. In that light, the phenomenon of Big Data in the humanitarian field is discussed and an agenda for the `datafication' of the supply network set out as a means of closing the loop between supply, need and impact

    The impact of imitative versus emulative learning mechanisms on artifactual variation: Implications for the evolution of material culture

    Get PDF
    Cultural evolutionary approaches highlight that different social learning processes may be involved in the maintenance of cultural traditions. Inevitably, for traditions to be maintained, they must be transmitted with reasonably fidelity. It has been proposed that 'imitation' (i.e., the direct copying of actions of others displayed in tasks such as toolmaking) generates relatively low rates of copying error. As such, imitation has often been ascribed an important role in the maintenance of traditions and in the 'ratcheting' of technological complexity over time. Conversely, 'emulation' (i.e., the copying of a result but not the behaviors that have led to that result) is allegedly associated with the production of relatively higher rates of copying error. However, to what extent these different social learning mechanisms generate distinct patterns of variation during the manufacture of material traditions remains largely unexplored empirically. Here, a controlled experiment was implemented using 60 participants who copied the shape of a 3D 'target handaxe form' from a standardized foam block. In an 'imitation condition', 30 participants were shown manufacturing techniques employed in the production of the target form and the target form itself. Conversely, in an 'emulation condition', 30 participants were shown only the (target) form. Copying error rates were statistically different, being significantly lower in the 'imitation' condition compared to the 'emulation' condition. Moreover, participants in the imitation condition matched the demonstrated behaviors with significantly higher copying fidelity than the alternative condition. These results illustrate that imitation may be imperative for the long-term perpetuation of visibly distinct archaeological traditions, especially in the case of lithic (reductive) traditions, where copying error rates can be expected to be relatively high. These findings, therefore, provide evidence that imitation may be required to explain the prolonged continuity of broad shape fidelity such as that seen in traditions of 'handaxe' manufacture during the Pleistocene.Leverhulme Trus

    Copying error, evolution, and phylogenetic signal in artifactual traditions: An experimental approach using "model artifacts"

    Get PDF
    This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.Spatio-temporal patterns of artifactual variation are increasingly being studied via the explicit application of cultural evolutionary theory and methods. Such broad-scale (macroevolutionary) patterns are mediated, however, by a series of small-scale (microevolutionary) processes that occur at the level of individual artifacts, and individual artifact users and producers. Within experimental biology, "model organisms" have played a crucial role in understanding the role of fundamental microevolutionary processes, such as mutation and the inheritance of variation, in respect to macroevolutionary patterns. There has, however, been little equivalent laboratory work to better understand how microevolutionary processes influence macroevolutionary patterns in artifacts and their analysis. Here, we adopt a "model artifact" approach to experimentally study the issues of copy error (mutation) and resultant phylogenetic signal in artifact traditions. We used morphometric procedures to examine shape copying error rates in our "model artifacts." We first established experimentally that statistically different rates of copying error (mutation) could be induced when participants used two different types of shaping tool to produce copies of foam "artifacts." Using this as a baseline, we then tested whether these differing mutation rates led to differing phylogenetic signal and accuracy in two separate experimental transmission chains (lineages), involving participants copying the previous participant's artifact. The analysis demonstrated that phylogenetic reconstruction is more accurate in artifactual lineages where copying error is demonstrably lower. Such results demonstrate how fidelity of transmission impacts directly on the evolution of technological traditions and their empirical analysis. In particular, these results highlight that differing contexts of cultural transmission relating to fidelity might lead to differing patterns of resolution within reconstructed evolutionary sequences. Overall, these analyses demonstrate the importance of a "model artifact" approach in discussions of cultural evolution, equivalent in importance to the use of model organisms in evolutionary biology in order to better understand fundamental microevolutionary processes of direct relevance to macroevolutionary archaeological patterns.We are grateful to Noreen von Cramon-Taubadel, Robin Torrence, and our anonymous reviewers for helpful and constructive comments on this paper. This research was partly supported by the Leverhulme Trust (F/07 476/AR) and by the Research Foundation for the State University of New York

    From cultural traditions to cumulative culture: parameterizing the differences between human and nonhuman culture.

    Get PDF
    The definitive version is available from Elsevier via http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2014.05.046This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Diverse species exhibit cultural traditions, i.e. population-specific profiles of socially learned traits, from songbird dialects to primate tool-use behaviours. However, only humans appear to possess cumulative culture, in which cultural traits increase in complexity over successive generations. Theoretically, it is currently unclear what factors give rise to these phenomena, and consequently why cultural traditions are found in several species but cumulative culture in only one. Here, we address this by constructing and analysing cultural evolutionary models of both phenomena that replicate empirically attestable levels of cultural variation and complexity in chimpanzees and humans. In our model of cultural traditions (Model 1), we find that realistic cultural variation between populations can be maintained even when individuals in different populations invent the same traits and migration between populations is frequent, and under a range of levels of social learning accuracy. This lends support to claims that putative cultural traditions are indeed cultural (rather than genetic) in origin, and suggests that cultural traditions should be widespread in species capable of social learning. Our model of cumulative culture (Model 2) indicates that both the accuracy of social learning and the number of cultural demonstrators interact to determine the complexity of a trait that can be maintained in a population. Combining these models (Model 3) creates two qualitatively distinct regimes in which there are either a few, simple traits, or many, complex traits. We suggest that these regimes correspond to nonhuman and human cultures, respectively. The rarity of cumulative culture in nature may result from this interaction between social learning accuracy and number of demonstrators.Leverhulme Trus

    Differences in Manufacturing Traditions and Assemblage-Level Patterns: the Origins of Cultural Differences in Archaeological Data

    Get PDF
    AcceptedArticle in PressThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Springer via the DOI in this record.© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York A relationship between behavioral variability and artifactual variability is a founding principle of archaeology. However, this relationship is surprisingly not well studied empirically from an explicitly “microevolutionary” perspective. Here, we experimentally simulated artifactual variation in two populations of “artifact” manufacturers, involving only a single behavioral difference in terms of their “tradition” of manufacturing tool. We then statistically analyzed shape variation in the resultant artifacts. In many respects, patterned differences might not have been expected to emerge given the simple nature of the task, the fact that only a single behavioral variable differed in our two populations, and all participants copied the same target artifact. However, multivariate analyses identified significant differences between the two “assemblages.” These results have several implications for our understanding and theoretical conceptualization of the relationship between behavior and artifactual variability, including the analytical potency of conceiving of artifacts as the product of behavioral “recipes” comprised of individual “ingredient” behavioral properties. Indeed, quite trivial behavioral differences, in generating microevolutionarily potent variability, can thus have long-term consequences for artifactual changes measured over time and space. Moreover, measurable “cultural” differences in artifacts can emerge not necessarily only because of a strict “mental template” but as the result of subtle differences in behavioral ingredients that are socially learned at the community level.We are grateful to Noreen von Cramon-Taubadel, Metin Eren, and the anonymous reviewers and editors at JAMT for helpful and constructive comments on this paper. This research was partly supported by the Leverhulme Trust (F/07 476/AR) and by the Research Foundation for the State University of New York

    An experimental test of the accumulated copying error model of cultural mutation for Acheulean handaxe size

    Get PDF
    PublishedJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tArchaeologists interested in explaining changes in artifact morphology over long time periods have found it useful to create models in which the only source of change is random and unintentional copying error, or 'cultural mutation'. These models can be used as null hypotheses against which to detect non-random processes such as cultural selection or biased transmission. One proposed cultural mutation model is the accumulated copying error model, where individuals attempt to copy the size of another individual's artifact exactly but make small random errors due to physiological limits on the accuracy of their perception. Here, we first derive the model within an explicit mathematical framework, generating the predictions that multiple independently-evolving artifact chains should diverge over time such that their between-chain variance increases while the mean artifact size remains constant. We then present the first experimental test of this model in which 200 participants, split into 20 transmission chains, were asked to faithfully copy the size of the previous participant's handaxe image on an iPad. The experimental findings supported the model's prediction that between-chain variance should increase over time and did so in a manner quantitatively in line with the model. However, when the initial size of the image that the participants resized was larger than the size of the image they were copying, subjects tended to increase the size of the image, resulting in the mean size increasing rather than staying constant. This suggests that items of material culture formed by reductive vs. additive processes may mutate differently when individuals attempt to replicate faithfully the size of previously-produced artifacts. Finally, we show that a dataset of 2601 Acheulean handaxes shows less variation than predicted given our empirically measured copying error variance, suggesting that other processes counteracted the variation in handaxe size generated by perceptual cultural mutation.This work was supported by a Leverhulme Trust Research Project Grant (F/07 476/AR - http://www.leverhulme.ac.uk)
    • 

    corecore