ArticleEvolutionary anthropology2020
Baldwin effects in early stone tools.
Article in Evolutionary anthropology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cognitive Archeology and the Attentional System: An Evolutionary Mismatch for the GenusJournal of Intelligence · 2023Article
- The transition from animal to human culture-simulating the social protocell hypothesis.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Evolving Belief, Evolving Minds: Evolutionary Insights Into the Development and Functioning of Human Society.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Middle Pleistocene fire use: The first signal of widespread cultural diffusion in human evolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Baldwin effects in early stone tools.Evolutionary anthropology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A sizeable dataset comprising millions of lithic artifacts sampling over two million years of early paleolithic tool technology from Africa and Eurasia is now available. The widespread presupposition of an exclusively cultural, that is, socially learned, nature of early stone tools from at least Acheulean times onwards has been challenged by researchers who hypothesize that these tools, a crucial element of early hominin survival strategies, may partly have been under genetic control, next to the effects of various other determinants. The discussion this hypothesis has sparked off in the present journal is here explored somewhat further, focusing on the Baldwin effect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.